Upload
others
View
1
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
1
AKT antagonist AZD5363 influences estrogen receptor function in endocrine resistant
breast cancer and synergises with fulvestrant (ICI182780) in vivo
Ricardo Ribas1*, Sunil Pancholi1*, Stephanie K. Guest1*, Elisabetta Marangoni2, Qiong Gao1,
Aurélie Thuleau2, Nikiana Simigdala1, Urszula Polanska3, Hayley Campbell3, Aradhana Rani1,
Gianmaria Liccardi1, Stephen Johnston4, Barry R. Davies3, Mitch Dowsett1,4, Lesley-Ann
Martin1§
* These authors contributed equally
1Breakthrough Breast Cancer Research Centre, Institute of Cancer Research, London, United
Kingdom; 2Translational Research Dept., Institut Curie, Paris, France 3Oncology Innovative
Medicines, AstraZeneca, Alderley Park, Macclesfield, United Kingdom; 4 Royal Marsden
Hospital, London, United Kingdom
Running title: Effect of AZD5363 in endocrine resistant breast cancer
Financial support: This study was supported by the Mary-Jean Mitchell Green
Foundation, Breakthrough Breast Cancer funding to M. Dowsett and L.A. Martin and The
AstraZeneca Global Alliance to L.A. Martin, M. Dowsett and S. Johnston. We also
acknowledge NHS funding to the Royal Marsden Hospital’s NIHR Biomedical Research
Centre received by M. Dowsett and S. Johnston
§ Corresponding author:
Dr Lesley-Ann Martin, The Breakthrough Breast Cancer Research Centre, Institute of Cancer
Research, 237 Fulham Road, London, SW3 6JB, UK
Email. [email protected], Tel: +44(0) 207 153 5329, Fax: +44(0) 207 153 5340
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
2
Conflict of Interest: RR, SP, SKG, EM, QG, AT, NS, HC, AR, GL, SJ, MT and LAM declare
no conflict of interest. UP is an employee of AstraZeneca and BRD is an employee and
shareholder in AstraZeneca.
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
3
Abstract
Phosphoinositide-3-kinase/protein-kinaseB/mammalian target of rapamycin (PI3K/AKT/mTOR)
signalling plays an important role in breast cancer (BC). Its interaction with estrogen receptor
(ER) signalling becomes more complex and inter-dependent with acquired endocrine resistance.
Targeting mTOR combined with endocrine therapy has shown clinical utility, however, a
negative feedback-loop exists downstream of PI3K/AKT/mTOR. Direct blockade of AKT
together with endocrine therapy may improve BC treatment. AZD5363, a novel pan-AKT kinase
catalytic inhibitor, was examined in a panel of ER+ BC cell lines (MCF7, HCC1428, T47D,
ZR75.1) adapted to long-term-estrogen-deprivation (LTED) or tamoxifen (TamR). AZD5363
caused a dose-dependent decrease in proliferation in all cell lines tested (GI50<500nM) except
HCC1428 and HCC1428-LTED. T47D-LTED and ZR75-LTED were the most sensitive of the
lines (GI50~100nM). AZD5363 re-sensitised TamR cells to tamoxifen and acted synergistically
with fulvestrant. AZD5363 decreased p-AKT/mTOR targets leading to a reduction in ERα-
mediated transcription in a context specific manner and concomitant decrease in recruitment of
ER and CREB-binding protein (CBP) to estrogen-response-elements located on the TFF1, PGR
and GREB1 promoters. Furthermore, AZD5363 reduced expression of cell-cycle-regulatory
proteins. Global gene expression highlighted ERBB2-ERBB3, ERK5 and IGF1 signaling
pathways driven by MYC as potential feedback-loops. Combined treatment with AZD5363 and
fulvestrant showed synergy in an ER+ patient derived xenograft and delayed tumour progression
post-cessation of therapy. These data support the combination of AZD5363 with fulvestrant as a
potential therapy for BC that is sensitive or resistant to E-deprivation or tamoxifen and that
activated AKT is a determinant of response, supporting the need for clinical evaluation.
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
4
Introduction
Around 80% of breast cancers (BCs) express estrogen receptor alpha (ER) and depend on
estrogen (E) to grow. Strategies to target ER activity include depriving the hormone dependent
tumour cells of E by the use of aromatase inhibitors (AI) (1) or the use of anti-estrogens such as
tamoxifen or fulvestrant, both of which compete with E for the ER. Despite the efficacy of these
agents, many tumours exhibit de novo or develop acquired mechanisms of resistance.
De-regulated signalling through the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway is a feature of most types of
cancer cells (2) and has been linked to endocrine resistant BC (3-5). Activation of PI3K/AKT
occurs via gain-of-function mutations in the catalytic domain of PI3K (PIK3CA) and the
regulatory subunit p85α (PIK3R1), amplification of PIK3CA, PIK3CB and PDK1; or by reduced
expression of phosphatase-and-tensin-homolog-deleted on chromosome ten (PTEN), an
endogenous inhibitor of the PI3K/AKT pathway (6). Furthermore, mutation and amplification of
AKT 1, 2 and 3 together with ERBB2, FGFR1, MET and IGF-1R have also been associated with
activation of this signalling axis.
It is clear, that the ER can become involved with the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway in BC cells,
with evidence for both genomic and non-genomic cross-talk between this signalling pathway
and ER accounting for endocrine resistance (7-9). Growth factor mediated activation of AKT
can potentiate ER classical transcriptional activity via phosphorylation at serine 167 in the AF1
domain leading to ligand-independent transactivation (10-12). Similarly, elevated levels of AKT
have been shown to change the genome-wide binding pattern of ER, effectively altering the ER-
program (13). These bi-directional interactions between hormonal and kinase signalling
pathways create self-reinforcing synergistic loops that potentiate pro-survival signals and may
allow BC cells to escape normal endocrine responsiveness.
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
5
Targeting the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway in association with endocrine therapy has seemed a
sensible strategy to explore. However, blockade of a single protein in a complex signalling
cascade is unlikely to provide total or prolonged growth inhibition. An important negative
feedback loop exists downstream in the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway that may limit the
effectiveness of mTOR inhibitors in BC. The mTOR activated kinase, S6K1, phosphorylates and
destabilises the IRS1 and IRS2 proteins in insulin-like growth factor (IGF) responsive cells (14).
In these cells, mTORC1 inhibition can lead to a reduction in S6K1 activity, which in turn allows
IRS1/2 expression to be increased with associated enhanced activation of IGFR1-dependent
AKT activity. Concern has been raised that activation of this negative feedback loop may
overcome the anti-tumour activity of mTORC1 blockade and limit the effectiveness of
rapamycin analogues (14,15).
In recent years, it has been suggested that direct blockade of AKT in combination with
endocrine therapy, may provide a better rationale for treatment of endocrine resistant BC,
impacting on both cell survival/apoptosis and ER ligand-independent signaling. A novel pan-
AKT kinase catalytic inhibitor (AZD5363) has been developed and shown to inhibit the growth
of a range of human tumor xenografts, either as monotherapy or in combination with HER2
inhibitors or with docetaxel (16). A recent study has also reported that combinations of AKT and
IGF-1R/InsR inhibitors can be effective in the treatment of hormone-independent ER+ BC (17).
On the basis of these data, AZD5363 is currently being investigated in phase I clinical trials.
Further investigations on intelligent combinations of signal transduction inhibitors are urgently
required both in pre-clinical models and in clinical trials. In this manuscript, we describe for the
first time the effectiveness and molecular consequence of combining AZD5363 with the four
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
6
most widely used approaches to endocrine therapy in the clinic, namely E-deprivation,
tamoxifen, fulvestrant and AI in pre-clinical models of endocrine sensitive and resistant ER+ BC,
as well as in a patient-derived xenograft (PDX) model of ER+ BC resistant to E-deprivation..
Material and methods
Antibodies and reagents
Primary antibodies against phospho-AKTSer473, phospho-AKTThr308, total-AKT, phospho-
p70S6Thr389, total-p70S6, phospho-S6 ribosomal protein (RP)Ser235/236, total-S6RP, phospho-
EGFRTyr1068, total-EGFR, phospho-ERBB2Tyr1248, phospho-ERBB3Tyr1222, phospho-
ERBB4Tyr1284, phospho-ERαSer167, phospho-4EBP1Thr37/46, total-4EBP1, phospho-RbSer807/811,
total-Rb, phospho-RAFSer259, phospho-RAFSer338, total-RAF, phospho-PRAS40Thr246, total-
PRAS40, Cyclin D1, Cyclin D3, total-ERK1/2, 14-3-3 were purchased from Cell Signalling
Technology, UK; total-IGF1R, cleaved-PARP, total-ERα and total-ERBB3 were purchased from
Santa Cruz; phospho-ERK1/2 and Actin from Sigma; GAPDH (Abcam); PgR (Novocastro or
Dako); IRS-1 and total-ERBB2 (Millipore); IRS-2 (Upstate) and finally total-ERBB4
(Neomarkers). Secondary antibodies (anti-mouse and anti-rabbit horseradish peroxidase) were
obtained from Dako or Cell signalling. Antibodies used for chromatin immunoprecipitation were
purchased from Santa Cruz: ERα clone HC20 and CBP clone A22. 17-β-estradiol and 4-
hydroxytamoxifen (4-OHT) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich; fulvestrant (ICI182780),
letrozole and exemestane from Tocris Bioscience; AZD5363 was synthesised and supplied by
AstraZeneca UK.
Tissue culture
Human BC cell lines MCF7, T47D, ZR75.1 and HCC1428 were obtained from the American
Type Culture Collection, Rockville, USA between 2000 and 2012 and were cultured in phenol
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
7
red-free RPMI1640 medium supplemented with 10% fetal bovine serum and 1nM estradiol (E2).
All cell lines were banked in multiple aliquots to reduce the risk of phenotypic drift and identity
confirmed using iPLEX-pro (Agena Bioscience). LTED cells modeling resistance to an AI were
derived from all four parental cell lines by long-term culture in the presence of RPMI1640
medium containing 10% dextran charcoal stripped serum (DCC), as described previously (18).
The 1%MCF7 and TamR cell lines were cultured in DMEM/F-12 medium, as previously stated
(19). MCF7-2A and BT474-A3 cells stably expressing CYP19 (AROM) were derived from
parental MCF7 and BT474 cells, respectively and were maintained in phenol red-free
RPMI1640 medium containing 10% fetal bovine serum supplemented with 1nM E2 and 1mg/ml
G-418 (Sigma-Aldrich, UK) (20). All cell lines were stripped of steroids for 48-72-hours prior
to the start of experiments.
Proliferation and colony formation assays
Cells were seeded in 10% DCC into 96-well tissue culture plates and allowed to acclimatize
overnight. Monolayers were then treated with RPMI1640 + 10% DCC containing increasing
concentrations of AZD5363, with or without the presence of 0.01nM of E2. In order to assess
the effects of AZD5363 in combination with endocrine agents, cells were maintained in the
presence of GI50 values of AZD5363 along with increasing concentrations of endocrine agent 4-
OHT, fulvestrant or anastrozole. The medium was replaced after 3-days and cells were cultured
for a total of 6-days. Each experiment was performed at least 3 times with 8 replicates per
treatment. Cell viability was determined using the CellTitre-Glo® Luminescent Cell Viability
Assay (Promega), according to the manufacture’s protocol. Values were expressed as % viability
relative to the untreated control.
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
8
For the colony formation assays, cells were seeded into 6-well plates and allowed to acclimatise
for 24-hours. Subsequently, cells were treated with the drug combinations indicated, every 3-4
days, for the duration of 14-days until colonies were evident. Cells were then fixed using ice-
cold methanol and stained using 0.5% w/v crystal violet in 90% H20/10% methanol.
Drug interaction analysis
To determine the nature of the interaction between AZD5363 and endocrine agents, combination
studies were carried out using Chou and Talalay's constant ratio combination model (21). Cells
were treated with increasing doses of AZD5363 alone, endocrine agent alone, or an equipotent
combination of AZD5363 and endocrine agent for 6 days. The GI50 for each drug alone was used
to define the ratio of equipotent doses and serial dilutions of the combinations used. Interactions
were calculated using Calcusyn software (BIOSOFT), based on the combination index (CI)
equation of Chou and Talalay. The CIs for a growth inhibition of 50%, 75%, and 90% were
obtained using mutually non-exclusive Monte Carlo CI simulations. Drug interaction was scored
using the CI so that: CI=1 is additive, CI <1 is synergistic, CI >1 is antagonistic.
Transcriptional assays
Cell lines were seeded in 24-well plates in 10% DCC medium and left to acclimatize for 24-
hours, following transfection with Fugene 6 at a ratio of 6:1 (Promega) with 0.1μg of estrogen
response element linked luciferase (EREIItkluc) and 0.1μg of β-galactosidase (pCH110) reporter
constructs. The following day, cells were treated with the drugs combinations specified and left
for 24h. Luciferase (Promega) and β-galactosidase (GalactoStar, Applied Biosystems) activity
were measured using a luminometer. Each experiment was performed 3 times with 3-4 replicates
per treatment.
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
9
Real-time quantitative PCR
mRNA from treated cells was extracted with RNeasy Mini Kit (Qiagen), as per the
manufacturer's instructions, and quantification performed using the Agilent 2100
Bioanalyzer (Expert Software version B.02.03) with RNA Nano LabChip Kits (Agilent
Technologies). Total RNA was reverse transcribed using SuperScript III (Invitrogen) and
random primers, in accordance with the manufacturer's instructions. cDNA was subjected
to quantitative PCR using 10ng of cDNA in triplicate using the ABI Perkin-Elmer Prism
7900HT Sequence detection system (Applied Biosystems). Taqman gene expression assays
(Applied Biosystems) were used to quantify TFF1 (Hs00907239_m1), PGR
(Hs01556702_m1) CDK7 (Hs00361486_m1); EIF2A (Hs00230684_m1); FOXO3
(Hs00818121_m1); IGF1R (Hs00609566_m1); IRS2 (Hs00275843_s1); MAP2K5
(Hs00177134); MYC (Hs00153408); NRIP1 (Hs00942766_s1); NR2F2 (Hs00819630_m1);
PIK3R1 (Hs00381459_m1); PTEN (Hs02621230_s1) and GREB1 (Hs00536409_m1),
together with FKBP15 (Hs00391480_m1) as housekeeping gene, to normalise the data.
The relative quantity was determined using ΔΔct, according to the manufacturer's
instructions (Applied Biosystems).
Chromatin immunoprecipitation
MCF7-LTED cells were cross-linked in 1% formaldehyde at room temperature for 10-min
and then quenched with 125mM glycine. Samples were then lysed, sonicated and
chromatin was immunoprecipitated by overnight incubation at 4°C with ER, CBP or IgG
antibodies pre-bound with Protein G magnetic dynabeads (Invitrogen). Samples were then
washed vigorously with RIPA buffer and reversed cross-linked by an overnight incubation
in elution buffer at 65°C. DNA was digested with RNase and Proteinase K, purify
precipitated with phenol chloroform and eluted in Tris-HCl pH8.0. Real-time qPCR was
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
10
performed using the following oligonucleotides TFF1 forward (FWD): 5′ GGC CAT CTC
TCA CTA TGA ATC ACT TCT GCA 3′ and reverse (REV): 5′ GGC AGG CTC TGT
TTG CTT AAA GAG CGT TAG 3′, GREB-1 FWD 5’ GAAGGGCAGAGCTGATAACG
3’, GREB-1 REV 5’ GACCCAGTTGCCACACTTTT 3’, PGR FWD 5’
GCTCTGCCTTGGAATGAGGT 3’ and PGR REV 5’ AAGAATTTGGGGGTGTTGGT
3’.
Western blotting
Cells were seeded into dishes and allowed to attach overnight. Monolayers were treated with the
desired drug combinations for the required length of time. Whole-cell extracts were generated,
as described previously (18). For the xenograft samples, tumours were lysed on ice,
homogenized and sonicated. The resulting protein fraction was subjected to western blotting as
previously described (18). The numerical data for each biomarker was determined using
Genetools software and normalized to GAPDH control.
Cell cycle analysis
Cells were seeded into 10cm dishes and 24-hours later treated with the drug combinations
indicated for 48-hours. Cells were fixed 90% ethanol and stained with propidium iodide. Cell
cycle analysis was carried out using fluorescence-activated-cell sorting (FACS).
Gene expression data and microarray analysis
Gene expression analysis was performed in triplicate using RNA derived from MCF7 and their
LTED derivatives after treatment with or without AZD5363 for 24-hours. mRNA extraction and
quantification was performed, as previously stated. The 12 RNA samples were amplified,
labelled, and hybridized on HumanHT-12_V4 Expression BeadChip, according to the
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
11
manufacturer’s instructions (Illumina). Raw expression data were extracted using GenomeStudio
(www.illumina.com) software; the data were then transformed and normalized using variance-
stabilizing transformation and robust spline normalization method in the Lumi package in R
(http://www.bioconductor.org) (Accession number: GSE69893). Probes for which expression
levels were not reliably detected in one of the samples (detection p.value > 0.01) were filtered,
the remaining differentially expressed genes were identified by using the Class Comparison
(http://linus.nci.nih.gov/BRB-ArrayTools.html) using the thresholds of FDR < 5%. The
significantly expressed gene lists were subject to further pathway analysis using Ingenuity
Pathway Analysis (IPA) to identify altered pathways due to the AZD5363 treatment and the
altered pathways with p-value <0.05 were considered as significant.
Human tumour xenografts
In vivo efficacy studies were performed in 8-12-week old female Swiss nude mice
implanted with the PDX HBCx22OvaR, as previously described (22), in accordance with
the French Ethical Committee. Firstly, a pharmacodynamic (PD) study was performed for
4-days to assess biomarker changes with samples removed 2 and 4-hours post-treatment.
Between 5 and 7 mice were included in each group. Secondly, a long-term study to assess
changes in tumour volume and progression over 90-days was initiated. In order, to address
the ability of the combination to delay tumour progression, mice were followed for a
further 40 days post-drug withdrawal. The treatment groups received AZD5363 solubilized
in a 10% DMSO 25% w/v Kleptose HPB (Roquette) buffer by oral gavage, or fulvestrant
suspended in corn oil by subcutaneous injection into the flank. For the combination groups,
fulvestrant was dosed 2-hours before AZD5363. The control groups received both vehicles.
In the combination study, treatments were started when tumors reached a volume of 40-65
mm3. Each group included between 11 and 13 xenografts. Tumour volumes (measured by
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
12
caliper), animal body weight and tumour condition were recorded twice weekly for the
duration of the study. Tumor volumes were calculated as V=axb2/2, “a” being the largest
diameter, “b” the smallest. Growth inhibition from the start of treatment was assessed by
comparison of the differences in tumour volume between control and treated groups.
Because the variance in mean tumour volume data increases proportionally with volume
(and is therefore disproportionate between groups), data were log-transformed to remove
any size dependency before statistical evaluation. Tumor volumes were reported to the
initial volume as relative tumor volume (RTV). Percent of tumor growth inhibition (TGI)
was calculated at the end of treatments (day 88) as follow: (1-RTVtreated/ RTVcontrol)
x100. Statistical significance was evaluated using a one-tailed, two-sample t-test.
Fluidigm Analysis
Tumour samples were homogenised and RNA was extracted as described above. cDNA was
synthesised using a high-capacity cDNA reverse transcription kit (Applied Biosystems). ER-
dependent genes listed (AQP3 (Hs01105469_G1); AREG (Hs00950669_m1); BMF
(Hs00372937_m1); C3 (Hs00163811_m1); CASP9 (Hs00609647_m1); CCND1
(Hs00765553_m1); CCNG2 (Hs00171119_m1); CXCL12 (Hs03676656_m1); ESR1
(Hs00174860_m1); GATA3 (Hs00231122_m1); LAMB2 (Hs00158642_m1); MUC1
(Hs00159357_m1); MYBL1 (Hs00277143_m1); RET (Hs01120030m_1); SPRY1
(Hs01083036_s1); TFF3 (Hs00902278_m1) and ZEB1 (Hs00232783_m1)) were selected and
analysis was performed using the Fluidigm Biomark System, as per manufacture’s instructions
(Fluidigm). Data was analysed using a Real-Time PCR analysis software (version 3.1.3) and
ΔΔct calculated. All genes were normalised to the housekeeper PPIA (Hs04194521_s1). Linear
fold changes were calculated based upon the relative difference in mRNA expression compared
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
13
to vehicle control. Statistical analysis was subsequently performed using JMP 11.0 to determine
significant changes with a p-value of < 0.05.
Results
Effect of AZD5363 on cell growth of endocrine sensitive and resistant BC cell lines
A panel of endocrine sensitive and resistant BC cell lines were assessed for their sensitivity to
the AKT inhibitor AZD5363, a pyrrolopyrimidine-derived compound (Fig. 1A). MCF7, ZR75,
T47D, HCC1428 cell lines and their LTED derivatives were assessed both in the presence and
absence of E2. TamR and their parental cell line (1%MCF7) were assessed in 1% FBS and
aromatase transfected MCF7-2A and BT474-A3 cell lines were tested in the presence of
androstenedione.
The cell lines tested showed varying degrees of sensitivity to AZD5363. Of note, HCC1428 and
their LTED derivative were resistant to the antiproliferative effect of the drug, even at
concentrations in excess of 10μM (Fig. 1B & Supplementary Figure S1). T47D and their LTED
derivative together with ZR75-LTED showed the highest degree of sensitivity (GI50 c. 100nM).
MCF7 in the absence of E2, showed over a two-fold increase in sensitivity to AZD5363 (GI50
200nM) compared to in the presence of E2 (GI50 500nM). Assessment of MCF7-LTED and
ZR75 showed little effect of E2 on the sensitivity to AZD5363 (GI50 500nM). Of note, TamR
cells, similar to MCF7-LTED, have a GI50 of c. 400nM, showing less sensitivity compared to
MCF7 cells in the absence of E2. MCF7-2A showed a slightly higher degree of sensitivity to
MCF7 in the presence of E2 (400nM vs. 500nM, respectively). BT474-A3 revealed a GI50 of
approximately 600nM (Fig. 1B & Supplementary Figure S1).
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
14
Combination of AZD5363 and endocrine agents on cell proliferation
To assess the efficacy of combining AZD5363 with current endocrine therapies, all cell lines
were grown in the presence of their specific GI50 values for AZD5363 and increasing doses of 4-
OHT, fulvestrant or anastrozole. HCC1428 and their LTED derivatives were excluded from
future studies due to their resistance to AZD5363.
In the presence of 4-OHT, MCF7, MCF7-LTED and 1% MCF7 demonstrated increased drug
sensitivity when treated with AZD5363 compared to 4-OHT alone (c. 2-fold increase in
sensitivity) (Fig. 2A). In contrast, ZR75, T47D and their LTED derivative cell lines
demonstrated no added benefit when combining AZD5363 with 4-OHT, however, AZD5363 re-
sensitised the TamR cell line to the antiproliferative effect of tamoxifen (GI50 10nM).
Combination of fulvestrant with AZD5363 also increased drug sensitivity by c.2-fold in MCF7
and 1%MCF7 and by c.10-fold in MCF7-LTED and TamR compared to fulvestrant alone. ZR75,
T47D and their LTED derivatives showed no added benefit from the combination (Fig. 2B).
Finally, we assessed the effect of the combination of AZD5363 with increasing doses of
anastrozole in MCF7-2A and BT474-A3 cells. Here again, the combination of AZD5363 with
anastrozole versus anastrozole alone was superior (c. 5-10 fold increase in sensitivity to
anastrazole) (Fig. 2C). These data were further confirmed using a colony formation assay as an
orthogonal approach in MCF7 and MCF7-LTED cells (Fig. 2D).
Subsequently, we conducted formal assessment of the interaction between 4-OHT, fulvestrant or
anastrozole with AZD5363, using Calcusyn software (Supplementary Figure S2). T47D-LTED
and ZR75-LTED were precluded from this analysis, as they loose expression of ER.
Furthermore, as the TamR cell line is resistant to 4-OHT formal analyses could not be assessed
in response to the combination of AZD5363 with 4-OHT.
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
15
The combination of AZD5363 and 4-OHT was synergistic in MCF7, MCF7-LTED and
1%MCF7, with combination indices (CIs) < 1, at 50% and 75% growth inhibition. In contrast,
AZD5363 plus 4-OHT showed added benefit only in T47D at 50% and 75% growth inhibition.
In contrast, ZR75 at 75% and 90% growth inhibition showed no added benefit (CI>1)
(Supplementary Figure S2A).
Combination of fulvestrant with AZD5363 was predominantly synergistic in MCF7, MCF7-
LTED, 1%MCF7 and TamR. In contrast, the combination of fulvestrant and AZD5363 provided
no further benefit in T47D and ZR75 cells (Supplementary Figure S2B). The MCF7-2A and
BT474-A3 cells showed synergy with almost all doses of anastrozole when combined with
AZD5363 (Supplementary Figure S2C).
In summary, these results suggest that the combination of AZD5363 with endocrine therapy is
superior to monotherapy.
Analysis of the differential effects of AZD5363 ± endocrine therapy on PI3K/mTOR/AKT,
ER signalling and cell cycle arrest.
In order to investigate the effect of AZD5363 in combination with endocrine agents on cellular
signal transduction pathways (Fig. 3A), MCF7 and MCF7-LTED cells were treated with
AZD5363 for 1, 8, 24 or 48-hours ± E2, 4-OHT or fulvestrant, in order to establish the most
suitable time-points for further investigation. As few early changes were evident between 1 and
8-hours post-treatment, the 1-hour time-point was selected to depict early changes. Furthermore,
as 24-hour and 48-hours also showed similar alteration, the 48-hour time-point was selected to
show later events associated with AKT blockade, in particular changes associated with feed-
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
16
back loops discussed later in this study (Supplementary Figure S3A & B (1, 8 and 24 -hour time-
point) and Fig. 3B (48-hour time-point). Addition of AZD5363 resulted in increased
phosphorylation of AKT (S473 and T308) as early as 1-hour post-treatment and was maintained
even after 48-hours. Total AKT was suppressed in those cell lines showing the highest degree of
sensitivity to AZD5363, most notably T47D, T47D-LTED, ZR75-LTED and TamR. Treatment
with AZD5363 caused a marked reduction, or even complete loss, of pPRAS40 and S6 kinase.
Of particular note, total PRAS40 was suppressed in T47D and their LTED. Phosphorylation of
4EBP1, a downstream marker of the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway, was reduced in T47D, T47D-
LTED and ZR75-LTED in response to AZD5363 either alone or in combination with endocrine
therapy (Fig. 3B). AZD5363 also reduced expression of pRAF (S259), most noticeably in MCF7,
T47D and their LTED derivatives; in contrast, the TamR cell line showed an increase in pRAF
(S338). We have previously shown that inhibition of AKT can increase ERK signalling (19),
therefore we assessed the effect of AZD5363 on pERK1/2 and showed differential responses.
For instance, AZD5363 suppressed phosphorylation of ERK1/2 in T47D but caused an increase
in ZR75-LTED and TamR cells after 48-hours (Fig. 3B). As pAKT, pS6 and pERK1/2 are
known to phosphorylate and activate ER, we investigated the effect of AZD5363 ± endocrine
therapy on ER phosphorylation together with expression of the progesterone receptor (PGR), an
endogenous E-regulated gene. Assessment of ER phosphorylation indicated AZD5363 had the
clearest impact on reducing phosphorylation of ERser167 in the MCF7 and MCF7-LTED and
this associated with a slight but noticeable reduction in PGR expression in the MCF7 and
MCF7-LTED, particularly in the presence of 4-OHT. Of note, whilst T47D-LTED showed
undetectable levels of ER, AZD5363 caused a marked suppression of PGR in this cell line,
suggesting some residual ER-activity may still be present.
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
17
In order to assess the effect of AZD5363 on cell cycle arrest and apoptosis, we investigated
changes in protein expression of Cyclin D1/D3, Rb and induction of PARP cleavage (Fig. 3C).
The combination of AZD5363 ± endocrine therapy caused a decrease in expression of
phosphorylated Rb and cyclin D in the majority of cell lines tested, with a higher effect being
observed in combination with fulvestrant. Furthermore, cell cycle analysis showed a significant
reduction in S-phase in response to AZD5363 in MCF7 and MCF7-LTED (Supplementary
Figure S3C). Subtle increases in PARP-cleavage were evident in MCF7 although this did not
appear specific to treatment. In contrast, T47D-LTED showed increases in PARP cleavage
specifically in response to AZD5363 addition (Fig. 3C).
In summary, these data show AZD5363 impedes downstream AKT signalling and reduces ER-
phosphorylation in a context specific manner, leading to an increase in cell cycle arrest.
The effect of AZD5363 alone or in combination with endocrine therapy on receptor
tyrosine kinase activity and ER-transactivation
We further assessed the impact of AZD5363 on the expression and phosphorylation of receptor
tyrosine kinases (RTKs) in the target cell lines (Fig. 4A). Inhibition of AKT with AZD5363
resulted in upregulation and activation of RTKs, including EGFR, ERBB2, but also IRS2, which
was cell line specific (Fig. 4A). MCF7-LTED, ZR75 and most notably ZR75-LTED showed an
increase in pEGFR; T47D and T47D-LTED showed an increase in pERBB2 and IRS2; TamR
revealed increases pERBB3.
As cross talk between ER and RTK pathways is well documented (12), we assessed alterations
in ER-mediated transactivation after perturbation with AZD5363 alone or in combination with
endocrine therapy. MCF7, MCF7-LTED, T47D, ZR75 and TamR cells were transiently
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
18
transfected with an ERE-linked luciferase reporter construct and treated with E2, 4-OHT or
fulvestrant ± AZD5363 (Fig. 4B). AZD5363 showed a significant effect on ER transactivation of
MCF7, MCF7-LTED and T47D when in combination with all endocrine agents. In contrast, in
ZR75 the effect on ER transactivation was minimal, apart from when combined with fulvestrant.
TamR cells similarly showed minimal impact on ER-mediated transcription. Further analyses of
the expression of a panel of endogenous E-regulated genes (TFF1, PGR and GREB1), showed
that AZD5363 had a similar impact in keeping with the ERE-linked-luciferase assay with the
exception of T47D, which showed an increase in the expression of TFF1 when treated with
AZD5363 but a decrease in PGR and GREB1 (Supplementary Figure S4).
In order to address this further, chromatin immunoprecipitation was performed in MCF7-LTED
cells. AZD5363 caused a reduction in recruitment of ER, AIB1 and CBP to the EREs on the
TFF1, GREB1 and PGR promoters (Fig. 4C), supporting the impact of AZD5363 on ER-
mediated transactivation.
Gene expression analysis of MCF7 and MCF7-LTED identified MYC as a potential
regulator of resistance
Comparison of gene expression between MCF7 cells treated with or without AZD5363 in the
absence of E2, showed a total of 1695 genes differentially downregulated and 1751 genes
differential upregulated. MCF7-LTED cells showed fewer genes altered in response to
AZD5363 (983 genes differentially downregulated, versus 842 genes differentially upregulated).
The downregulated genes in both cell lines were mainly associated with metabolic and cell cycle
pathways (Table 1). The upregulated genes were associated with EIF2, mTOR and IGF1
signalling. Of note, ERBB2-ERBB3 signalling and big MAP kinase 1 (BMK1/ERK5) were
significantly increased in both cell lines in response to AZD5363, together with ILK1 and
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
19
integrin signalling. Furthermore, RAR pathway activation was also significantly upregulated in
both MCF7-LTED and MCF7 cells in response to AZD5363. In order to interrogate these
findings further, expression of selected genes representing activation of the various pathways
was tested using qRT-PCR and were shown to be significantly over-expressed (Supplementary
Figure S5) Of particular note, interrogation of genes within these pathways identified MYC,
PIK3R1, PTEN and FOXO3 as common elements (Supplementary Table S1, Supplementary
Figure S5). Further analysis revealed that MYC is upregulated over 2-fold (p<0.001) in the
MCF7-LTED and over 1.2-fold (p<0.05) in the MCF7 cell lines.
Combination of AZD5363 and fulvestrant in the luminal BC xenograft HBCx22OvaR
A high degree of redundancy in the kinase networks and cross-talk with ER is well documented
(23), suggesting destruction of ER with fulvestrant may be a better strategy than antagonism
with tamoxifen or blockade of estrogen biosynthesis with an AI. Therefore, we assessed the
combination of fulvestrant and AZD5363 compared with monotherapy in a patient derived
luminal BC xenograft HBCx22OvaR modeling acquired resistance to E-deprivation (22) (Fig. 5).
Treatments were well tolerated. Fulvestrant monotherapy treatment caused a modest but non-
significant reduction in tumour growth compared with the vehicle control group (30% inhibition,
p=0.11). Continuous dosing of AZD5363 at 50mg/kg bid resulted in a significant reduction in
tumour growth (57% inhibition, p=5.0E-03), compared with vehicle control. Combination of
fulvestrant with AZD5363 resulted in almost complete inhibition of tumour growth (80%
inhibition p< 1E-05) compared to vehicle control. The combination dosing was significantly
more active than AZD5363 and fulvestrant monotherapy groups (p=3.75E-03 and 6.3E-04,
respectively) (Fig. 5A). After 90-days of treatment, the therapies were withdrawn and tumour
volume assessed to establish the efficacy of the combination in delaying tumour progression.
Removal of AZD5363 showed a dramatic rise in tumour volume as early as 10-days post-
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
20
withdrawal (Fig. 5B), whilst the combination of AZD5363 plus fulvestrant showed sustained
anti-tunour effect even after 50 days post-cessation of treatment.
In order to assess dynamic changes in the PI3K/AKT/mTOR, ER, apoptotic and cell cycle
pathways, a second xenograft experiment was carried out to study tumour pharmacodynamics.
HBCx22OvaR were treated for 4-days with the combinations indicated and samples resected 2
and 4-hours post-dosing of AZD5363. As expected, western blot analysis showed significant
increases in pAKT (S473) and pAKT (T308) and decreases in pPRAS40 in response to
AZD5363. Two-hours post-treatment with AZD5363 showed a significant rise in PGR
expression compared to vehicle control and was negated by the addition of fulvestrant (Fig. 5C).
In order to assess the effect of AZD5363 on ER-mediated transcription, we used Fluidigm
analysis of several ER-dependent target genes (Fig. 5D). Fulvestrant caused a significant
reduction in expression of the majority of the genes selected whilst AZD5363 showed a trend
towards an increase. The combination of fulvestrant plus AZD5363 negated this rise. Four-hours
post-therapy showed a significant rise in ER-regulated genes in response to AZD5363
monotherapy and addition of fulvestrant did not suppress this effect with the exception of TFF1.
Analysis of CCND1 showed a decrease in response to fulvestrant and the combination with
AZD5363. However, 4-hours post-treatment showed a rise in expression. In contrast, CCNG2,
which blocks cell cycle entry and is negatively regulated by E-bound-ER and activated PI3K
(24,25), was increased in all AZD5363 treatment groups, indicative of cell cycle arrest.
Furthermore, AZD5363 caused increases in CASP9 and BMF expression indicating of a rise in
apoptosis (Fig. 5D).
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
21
Discussion
Activation of PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway has been shown to be involved in endocrine resistance
in BC, most notably via interaction with ER (8,10). Hence, AKT being a central mediator within
this pathway poses a rational therapeutic target in endocrine resistance BC. In support of this
notion, we have shown that suppression of AKT activity with the catalytic AKT inhibitor
AZD5363, inhibited the growth of ER+ human BC cells modelling acquired resistance to E-
deprivation and tamoxifen and prevented the emergence of hormone independent cells in vivo.
The combination of AZD5363 with endocrine therapy showed the greatest efficacy in both ER+,
endocrine sensitive and resistant cell lines, most notably those containing activating mutations in
PIK3CA and/or loss of PTEN function (Fig.1). In contrast, HCC1428, which are wild-type (wt)
for both genes, were resistant to AKT inhibition (GI50 > 10000nM). The combination of
AZD5363 with fulvestrant provided the greatest combination effect, which was later confirmed
in a patient derived xenograft model. Nonetheless, the combination of AZD5363 with an AI was
also highly effective. Moreover, ZR75-LTED and T47D-LTED, which have suppressed
expression of ER compared to their parental cells, were the most sensitive to the antiproliferative
effects of single agent AZD5363, with GI50 values less than 100nM. It is noteworthy, that
PIK3CA mutation may not be the only governing feature of sensitivity to AKT inhibition. For
instance, both MCF7 and T47D cells and their derivatives express mutant PIK3CA and wt-PTEN,
yet T47D were at least 2-fold more sensitive than MCF7, and this is most pronounced when
comparing T47D-LTED with MCF7-LTED, where there is a 5-fold difference in sensitivity.
Furthermore, ZR75, which are wt-PIK3CA and PTEN null, are 5-fold less sensitive than ZR75-
LTED, suggesting that whilst mutation within the pathway may delineate sensitivity in some
circumstances, cell context remains a defining feature.
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
22
Treatment with AZD5363 reduced phosphorylation of 4EBP1, a downstream mediator of the
mTOR pathway, and increased phosphorylation of AKT itself. The latter has been shown to
occur with several ATP-competitive inhibitors of AKT, as a result of the protein being
maintained in a hyperphosphorylated but catalytically inactive form (26). In all cell lines tested,
AZD5363 caused cell cycle arrest, most notably via suppression of phosphorylation of Rb and
reduction in cyclin D and in several cell lines this was associated with elevated apoptosis, most
notably in the T47D-LTED. Furthermore, fluidigm analysis of our HBCx22OvaR PDX showed
increased expression of CASP9 and BMF in response to AZD5363. These data are in keeping
with previous studies in which AKT dependent phosphorylation of BAD suppresses apoptosis
(27).
Previous studies have shown that AKT can phosphorylate ER at serine 167 in a ligand
independent manner and is associated with resistance to endocrine therapy (10,19); furthermore,
elevated AKT has been associated with an altered ER transcriptional program (13). In this
current study, we provided further support for these observations and showed that inhibition of
AKT in MCF7-LTED reduced recruitment of ER, AIB1 and CBP to EREs. Furthermore, the
combination of endocrine therapy with AZD5363 suppressed ER-mediated transcription to a
greater extent than either agent alone. In contrast, however, although AZD5363 suppressed the
proliferation of the TamR cell line and resensitised it to the antiproliferative effects of tamoxifen,
little impact on ER-mediated transcription in the presence of 4-OHT was evident compared to 4-
OHT alone. One explanation for this finding may be due to the high degree of redundancy in the
signal transduction pathways within the TamR cell line. We have previously shown that
phosphorylation of ERser167 can occur via pAKT or pERK1/2/pp90rsk. This was confirmed in
the current study where AZD5363 had no impact on ERser167 phosphorylation. It could be
postulated, that continued signalling via the pERK1/2 pathway may, in the long-term, negate the
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
23
initial antiproliferative effect of AZD5363 in this setting. Previous studies have shown that
targeting a single protein in a complex pathway can cause feedback loops resulting in increased
ER-mediated transcription (28). Here, we assessed expression of several ER-mediated target
genes both in our cell line models and in our patient derived xenograft in response to AZD5363.
Increased expression of ER-target genes appeared context-specific and time-dependent. One
explanation for these contrasting observations is the nature of the cross-talk between ER and
AKT. For instance, increased AKT signalling may lead to ligand-independent ER activity in
which the cell still relies on ER function for proliferation. Alternatively, increased AKT can
suppress ER-expression circumventing the need for ER-driven transcription. In the latter setting,
perturbation of AKT would therefore increase ER-mediated transcription. Taken together, these
data indicate that the combination of AZD5363 with a selective ER downregulator (SERD), such
as fulvestrant, may alleviate these potential ER-mediated feedback loops.
Studies have suggested that inhibition of kinases within the PI3K/mTOR/AKT pathway can lead
to upregulation of several RTKs impacting on their potential clinical utility (17,29-31). In order
to address this, we assessed the impact of AZD5363 on expression and phosphorylation of type
I/II growth factor receptors. AZD5363 caused a cell-type specific upregulation of various RTKs
including IGF1R, EGFR, ERBB2 and ERBB3. It has been suggested that altered expression of
these RTKs may impede the effectiveness of AZD5363 (17). In order to assess this further, we
used a global gene expression approach to identify networks of genes that were associated with
response and resistance to AZD5363. The significantly downregulated canonical pathways,
following treatment with AZD5363 were associated with cell cycle progression and metabolism,
confirming our observation in both proliferation and protein assays. One of the most
significantly upregulated pathways was EIF2 which was evident in both MCF7 and their LTED
derivative. The PERK-eIF2αP pathway mediates survival and facilitates adaptation to the
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
24
deleterious effects of the inactivation of PI3K or AKT (32). The IGF1 signaling pathway, which
encompasses IGF1R, IRS2 and FOXO3 was also significantly upregulated. Previous studies
have shown that upregulation of IGF1R maintains PI3K activity and PIP3 formation, to
counteract the inhibition of AKT which could potentially reduce the potency of AZD5363, via a
FOXO dependent transcriptional mechanism (17).
RAR signalling was also associated with inhibition of AKT activity. RAR transactivation is
suppressed by phosphorylation via AKT (33). Of note, RAR-alpha (α) is required for efficient
ER-mediated transcription and cell proliferation (34). Assessment of the effect of AZD5363 on
ER-mediated transactivation using an artificial reporter construct showed suppression of
transactivation. However, assessment of transcript levels of several endogenous E2-regulated
genes particularly in the T47D and TamR cell line as well as in our PDX model showed
increases in TFF1 and GREB1 expression, in keeping with previous studies with a dual
mTOR/PI3K inhibitor (35). Of note, assessment of genes within the RAR signalling pathways
showed increases in expression of CDK7, which has previously been shown to phosphorylate
and activate both ER (36) and RARα (37). Furthermore, high intratumoral RARα protein levels
correlate with reduced relapse free survival in ER+ patients treated with neoadjuvant tamoxifen
(38). Taken together, activation of RAR as a result of AKT inhibition may potentiate ER-activity
in certain settings.
ERK5 signaling pathway was significantly upregulated in response to AZD5363. ERK5, similar
to ERK1/2, regulates EGF-induced cell proliferation and is known to cross talk with ERBB2 and
PDGFR. Both of pathways were also elevated in response to AZD5363. ERK5 is also capable of
phosphorylating the ERK1/2 substrates MYC and AP1 (39). Moreover, ILK, HIF1 and VEGF
pathways were upregulated in response to AKT inhibition. Previous studies have shown that β-
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
25
parvin, which is lost in metastastic BC (40), leads to an upregulation of ILK/AKT mediated
signalling resulting in increased HIF1α and VEGF (41). Both HIF1α and VEGF contain internal
ribosome entry sites (IRES), located in their 5’ UTRs, allowing cap independent translation,
bypassing the requirement for mTOR/4EBP1 signaling (42). This may provide a survival
mechanism in response to chronic treatment with AZD5363. Of particular interest, MYC
expression was identified as a potential driver in six of the upregulated pathways in response to
AZD5363. MYC activity has been shown to abrogate response to mTOR inhibition in prostate
cancer via its interaction and upregulation of 4EBP1 (43). Notably, 4EBP1 expression did not
change in response to AZD5363 in our PDX model.
Overall, the transcriptional profiling revealed multiple mechanisms of compensation to AKT
inhibition, highlighting the complex interplay between ER and signal transduction pathways.
This global gene expression analysis did, however, use only one cell line model and its LTED
counterpart.
In conclusion, the results provide mechanistic evidence for the combination of AZD5363 and
endocrine therapy to delay the onset of resistance, as well as re-sensitise endocrine resistant
tumours to the antiproliferative effects of endocrine therapy. Most notably the combination of
AZD5363 with fulvestrant, supressing both the ER and AKT signalling axes appeared superior
to either agent alone. The current study also highlights potential routes of escape via RTK, RAR,
ERK5, MYC and PERK-eIF2αP signalling, that merit investigation for further improvements in
treatment efficacy.
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
26
References
1. Dowsett M, Howell A. Breast cancer: aromatase inhibitors take on tamoxifen. Nature medicine 2002;8(12):1341-4.
2. Shaw RJ, Cantley LC. Ras, PI(3)K and mTOR signalling controls tumour cell growth. Nature 2006;441(7092):424-30.
3. Shoman N, Klassen S, McFadden A, Bickis MG, Torlakovic E, Chibbar R. Reduced PTEN expression predicts relapse in patients with breast carcinoma treated by tamoxifen. Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc 2005;18(2):250-9.
4. Clark AS, West K, Streicher S, Dennis PA. Constitutive and inducible Akt activity promotes resistance to chemotherapy, trastuzumab, or tamoxifen in breast cancer cells. Molecular cancer therapeutics 2002;1(9):707-17.
5. Yu K, Toral-Barza L, Discafani C, Zhang WG, Skotnicki J, Frost P, et al. mTOR, a novel target in breast cancer: the effect of CCI-779, an mTOR inhibitor, in preclinical models of breast cancer. Endocrine-related cancer 2001;8(3):249-58.
6. Saal LH, Holm K, Maurer M, Memeo L, Su T, Wang X, et al. PIK3CA mutations correlate with hormone receptors, node metastasis, and ERBB2, and are mutually exclusive with PTEN loss in human breast carcinoma. Cancer research 2005;65(7):2554-9.
7. Simoncini T, Hafezi-Moghadam A, Brazil DP, Ley K, Chin WW, Liao JK. Interaction of oestrogen receptor with the regulatory subunit of phosphatidylinositol-3-OH kinase. Nature 2000;407(6803):538-41.
8. Miller TW, Hennessy BT, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Fox EM, Mills GB, Chen H, et al. Hyperactivation of phosphatidylinositol-3 kinase promotes escape from hormone dependence in estrogen receptor-positive human breast cancer. The Journal of clinical investigation 2010;120(7):2406-13.
9. Chen D, Washbrook E, Sarwar N, Bates GJ, Pace PE, Thirunuvakkarasu V, et al. Phosphorylation of human estrogen receptor alpha at serine 118 by two distinct signal transduction pathways revealed by phosphorylation-specific antisera. Oncogene 2002;21(32):4921-31.
10. Campbell RA, Bhat-Nakshatri P, Patel NM, Constantinidou D, Ali S, Nakshatri H. Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/AKT-mediated activation of estrogen receptor alpha: a new model for anti-estrogen resistance. The Journal of biological chemistry 2001;276(13):9817-24.
11. Kato S, Endoh H, Masuhiro Y, Kitamoto T, Uchiyama S, Sasaki H, et al. Activation of the estrogen receptor through phosphorylation by mitogen-activated protein kinase. Science 1995;270(5241):1491-4.
12. Smith CL. Cross-talk between peptide growth factor and estrogen receptor signaling pathways. Biology of reproduction 1998;58(3):627-32.
13. Bhat-Nakshatri P, Wang G, Appaiah H, Luktuke N, Carroll JS, Geistlinger TR, et al. AKT alters genome-wide estrogen receptor alpha binding and impacts estrogen signaling in breast cancer. Molecular and cellular biology 2008;28(24):7487-503.
14. O'Reilly KE, Rojo F, She QB, Solit D, Mills GB, Smith D, et al. mTOR inhibition induces upstream receptor tyrosine kinase signaling and activates Akt. Cancer research 2006;66(3):1500-8.
15. Sun SY, Rosenberg LM, Wang X, Zhou Z, Yue P, Fu H, et al. Activation of Akt and eIF4E survival pathways by rapamycin-mediated mammalian target of rapamycin inhibition. Cancer research 2005;65(16):7052-8.
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
27
16. Davies BR, Greenwood H, Dudley P, Crafter C, Yu DH, Zhang J, et al. Preclinical pharmacology of AZD5363, an inhibitor of AKT: pharmacodynamics, antitumor activity, and correlation of monotherapy activity with genetic background. Molecular cancer therapeutics 2012;11(4):873-87.
17. Fox EM, Kuba MG, Miller TW, Davies BR, Arteaga CL. Autocrine IGF-I/insulin receptor axis compensates for inhibition of AKT in ER-positive breast cancer cells with resistance to estrogen deprivation. Breast cancer research : BCR 2013;15(4):R55.
18. Martin LA, Farmer I, Johnston SR, Ali S, Marshall C, Dowsett M. Enhanced estrogen receptor (ER) alpha, ERBB2, and MAPK signal transduction pathways operate during the adaptation of MCF-7 cells to long term estrogen deprivation. The Journal of biological chemistry 2003;278(33):30458-68.
19. Pancholi S, Lykkesfeldt AE, Hilmi C, Banerjee S, Leary A, Drury S, et al. ERBB2 influences the subcellular localization of the estrogen receptor in tamoxifen-resistant MCF-7 cells leading to the activation of AKT and RPS6KA2. Endocrine-related cancer 2008;15(4):985-1002.
20. Banerjee S, Zvelebil M, Furet P, Mueller-Vieira U, Evans DB, Dowsett M, et al. The vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitor PTK787/ZK222584 inhibits aromatase. Cancer research 2009;69(11):4716-23.
21. Chou TC, Talalay P. Quantitative analysis of dose-effect relationships: the combined effects of multiple drugs or enzyme inhibitors. Advances in enzyme regulation 1984;22:27-55.
22. Cottu P, Bieche I, Assayag F, El Botty R, Chateau-Joubert S, Thuleau A, et al. Acquired resistance to endocrine treatments is associated with tumor-specific molecular changes in patient-derived luminal breast cancer xenografts. Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research 2014;20(16):4314-25.
23. Ali S, Coombes RC. Endocrine-responsive breast cancer and strategies for combating resistance. Nature reviews Cancer 2002;2(2):101-12.
24. Stossi F, Likhite VS, Katzenellenbogen JA, Katzenellenbogen BS. Estrogen-occupied estrogen receptor represses cyclin G2 gene expression and recruits a repressor complex at the cyclin G2 promoter. The Journal of biological chemistry 2006;281(24):16272-8.
25. Martinez-Gac L, Alvarez B, Garcia Z, Marques M, Arrizabalaga M, Carrera AC. Phosphoinositide 3-kinase and Forkhead, a switch for cell division. Biochemical Society transactions 2004;32(Pt 2):360-1.
26. Okuzumi T, Fiedler D, Zhang C, Gray DC, Aizenstein B, Hoffman R, et al. Inhibitor hijacking of Akt activation. Nature chemical biology 2009;5(7):484-93.
27. Zha J, Harada H, Yang E, Jockel J, Korsmeyer SJ. Serine phosphorylation of death agonist BAD in response to survival factor results in binding to 14-3-3 not BCL-X(L). Cell 1996;87(4):619-28.
28. Bosch A, Li Z, Bergamaschi A, Ellis H, Toska E, Prat A, et al. PI3K inhibition results in enhanced estrogen receptor function and dependence in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer. Science translational medicine 2015;7(283):283ra51.
29. Chakrabarty A, Sanchez V, Kuba MG, Rinehart C, Arteaga CL. Feedback upregulation of HER3 (ErbB3) expression and activity attenuates antitumor effect of PI3K inhibitors. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2012;109(8):2718-23.
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
28
30. Chandarlapaty S, Sawai A, Scaltriti M, Rodrik-Outmezguine V, Grbovic-Huezo O, Serra V, et al. AKT inhibition relieves feedback suppression of receptor tyrosine kinase expression and activity. Cancer cell 2011;19(1):58-71.
31. Rodrik-Outmezguine VS, Chandarlapaty S, Pagano NC, Poulikakos PI, Scaltriti M, Moskatel E, et al. mTOR kinase inhibition causes feedback-dependent biphasic regulation of AKT signaling. Cancer discovery 2011;1(3):248-59.
32. Mounir Z, Krishnamoorthy JL, Wang S, Papadopoulou B, Campbell S, Muller WJ, et al. Akt determines cell fate through inhibition of the PERK-eIF2alpha phosphorylation pathway. Science signaling 2011;4(192):ra62.
33. Srinivas H, Xia D, Moore NL, Uray IP, Kim H, Ma L, et al. Akt phosphorylates and suppresses the transactivation of retinoic acid receptor alpha. The Biochemical journal 2006;395(3):653-62.
34. Ross-Innes CS, Stark R, Holmes KA, Schmidt D, Spyrou C, Russell R, et al. Cooperative interaction between retinoic acid receptor-alpha and estrogen receptor in breast cancer. Genes & development 2010;24(2):171-82.
35. Creighton CJ, Fu X, Hennessy BT, Casa AJ, Zhang Y, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, et al. Proteomic and transcriptomic profiling reveals a link between the PI3K pathway and lower estrogen-receptor (ER) levels and activity in ER+ breast cancer. Breast cancer research : BCR 2010;12(3):R40.
36. Chen D, Riedl T, Washbrook E, Pace PE, Coombes RC, Egly JM, et al. Activation of estrogen receptor alpha by S118 phosphorylation involves a ligand-dependent interaction with TFIIH and participation of CDK7. Molecular cell 2000;6(1):127-37.
37. Bour G, Gaillard E, Bruck N, Lalevee S, Plassat JL, Busso D, et al. Cyclin H binding to the RARalpha activation function (AF)-2 domain directs phosphorylation of the AF-1 domain by cyclin-dependent kinase 7. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 2005;102(46):16608-13.
38. Johansson HJ, Sanchez BC, Mundt F, Forshed J, Kovacs A, Panizza E, et al. Retinoic acid receptor alpha is associated with tamoxifen resistance in breast cancer. Nat Commun 2013;4.
39. Nishimoto S, Nishida E. MAPK signalling: ERK5 versus ERK1/2. EMBO reports 2006;7(8):782-6.
40. Mongroo PS, Johnstone CN, Naruszewicz I, Leung-Hagesteijn C, Sung RK, Carnio L, et al. Beta-parvin inhibits integrin-linked kinase signaling and is downregulated in breast cancer. Oncogene 2004;23(55):8959-70.
41. Kimura M, Murakami T, Kizaka-Kondoh S, Itoh M, Yamamoto K, Hojo Y, et al. Functional molecular imaging of ILK-mediated Akt/PKB signaling cascades and the associated role of beta-parvin. Journal of cell science 2010;123(Pt 5):747-55.
42. Morfoisse F, Kuchnio A, Frainay C, Gomez-Brouchet A, Delisle MB, Marzi S, et al. Hypoxia induces VEGF-C expression in metastatic tumor cells via a HIF-1alpha-independent translation-mediated mechanism. Cell reports 2014;6(1):155-67.
43. Balakumaran BS, Porrello A, Hsu DS, Glover W, Foye A, Leung JY, et al. MYC activity mitigates response to rapamycin in prostate cancer through eukaryotic initiation factor 4E-binding protein 1-mediated inhibition of autophagy. Cancer research 2009;69(19):7803-10.
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
29
Table 1. Top upregulated and downregulated canonical pathways after treatment
with AZD5363 in (A) MCF7-LTED and (B) MCF7 cell lines in the absence of E2.
MCF7-LTED and MCF7 cells were treated in the presence or absence of AZD5363 for 24-
hours and RNA was submitted to microarray analysis
A.
MCF7-LTED upregulated pathways
p-value MCF7-LTED-Downregulated Pathways
p-value
EIF2 Signaling 2.00E-07 Mitotic Roles of Polo-Like Kinase 2.51E-11
IGF-1 Signaling 3.31E-04Cell Cycle: G2/M DNA Damage Checkpoint Regulation 3.16E-11
RAR Activation 1.07E-03Remodeling of Epithelial Adherens Junctions 7.41E-10
mTOR Signaling 1.95E-03 ATM Signaling 7.24E-09 Diphthamide Biosynthesis 4.37E-03 Hereditary Breast Cancer Signaling 8.51E-09 Endometrial Cancer Signaling 1.48E-02
Role of CHK Proteins in Cell Cycle Checkpoint Control 1.95E-08
PTEN Signaling 1.55E-02 Protein Ubiquitination Pathway 3.02E-08 ErbB2-ErbB3 Signaling 2.09E-02 GADD45 Signaling 6.03E-08
Insulin Receptor Signaling 2.57E-02DNA damage-induced 14-3-3σ Signaling 6.03E-08
Clathrin-mediated Endocytosis Signaling 2.63E-02 14-3-3-mediated Signaling 8.13E-08 Mouse Embryonic Stem Cell Pluripotency 3.09E-02 Cyclins and Cell Cycle Regulation 4.07E-07
ERK5 Signaling 3.24E-02Role of BRCA1 in DNA Damage Response 4.79E-07
Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor Signaling 3.39E-02
Sertoli Cell-Sertoli Cell Junction Signaling 1.70E-06
Ketolysis 3.63E-02Cell Cycle Control of Chromosomal Replication 2.19E-06
HGF Signaling 3.80E-02Germ Cell-Sertoli Cell Junction Signaling 2.75E-06
DNA Methylation and Transcriptional Repression Signaling 4.07E-02 Mismatch Repair in Eukaryotes 3.72E-06 Amyloid Processing 4.37E-02 Estrogen-mediated S-phase Entry 8.13E-06
Calcium Transport I 4.47E-02Breast Cancer Regulation by Stathmin1 2.69E-05
Growth Hormone Signaling 4.79E-02Epithelial Adherens Junction Signaling 4.07E-05
ILK Signaling 4.90E-02 Glycolysis I 4.27E-05
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
30
B.
MCF7-Upregulted Pathways
p-value MCF7-Downregulated Pathways p-value
Hypoxia Signaling in the Cardiovascular System
1.26E-06 Mitotic Roles of Polo-Like Kinase 2.88E-07
Protein Ubiquitination Pathway
4.90E-06 Cell Cycle: G2/M DNA Damage Checkpoint Regulation
7.94E-07
EIF2 Signaling 3.39E-05 Cell Cycle Control of Chromosomal Replication
4.07E-06
Aryl Hydrocarbon Receptor Signaling
1.29E-04 Role of CHK Proteins in Cell Cycle Checkpoint Control
5.25E-06
IGF-1 Signaling 5.37E-04 GADD45 Signaling 7.08E-06 ERK5 Signaling 1.05E-03 Estrogen-mediated S-phase Entry 8.91E-06 ILK Signaling 1.20E-03 Mismatch Repair in Eukaryotes 1.41E-05 Molecular Mechanisms of Cancer
1.35E-03 ATM Signaling 1.41E-05
Integrin Signaling 1.51E-03 Remodeling of Epithelial Adherens Junctions
1.62E-05
NGF Signaling 1.78E-03 Role of BRCA1 in DNA Damage Response
1.78E-05
p53 Signaling 1.86E-03 Sertoli Cell-Sertoli Cell Junction Signaling
6.92E-05
Regulation of eIF4 and p70S6K Signaling
2.00E-03 Hereditary Breast Cancer Signaling 2.69E-04
Neurotrophin/TRK Signaling 2.19E-03 Cholesterol Biosynthesis I 3.09E-04 Estrogen Receptor Signaling 2.34E-03 Cholesterol Biosynthesis II (via
24,25-dihydrolanosterol) 3.09E-04
PDGF Signaling 2.88E-03 Cholesterol Biosynthesis III (via Desmosterol)
3.09E-04
Renal Cell Carcinoma Signaling
2.88E-03 Breast Cancer Regulation by Stathmin1
3.80E-04
Colanic Acid Building Blocks Biosynthesis
3.55E-03 Cyclins and Cell Cycle Regulation 4.37E-04
ErbB2-ErbB3 Signaling 4.27E-03 DNA damage-induced 14-3-3σ Signaling
5.13E-04
VEGF Signaling 4.37E-03 Germ Cell-Sertoli Cell Junction Signaling
7.41E-04
RAR Activation 5.25E-03 Superpathway of Cholesterol Biosynthesis
1.07E-03
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
31
Figure Legends
Figure 1. GI50 values for antiproliferative effect of AZD5363 in relation to PTEN,
PI3KCA and HER2 status in endocrine resistant and sensitive BC cell lines. (A)
Chemical structure of AZD5363. (B) Cells were treated in absence or presence of
exogenous E2 (0.01nM) and doubling concentrations of AZD5363. Treatments were
performed at day 1 and day 3 after seeding. After 6 days of treatment, cell viability was
analyzed by using a cell titre-glo assay and GI50 values were plotted. Genotype is depicted
by greyscale for expression of PTEN, PI3KCA and HER2
Figure 2. Antiproliferative effect of AZD5363 in combination with escalating doses of
various endocrine agents. (A) 4-OHT, (B) fulvestrant and (C) anastrozole, in endocrine
sensitive and resistance BC cell lines. Cell lines were treated with vehicle or GI50
concentrations of AZD5363 and increasing amounts of 4-OHT, fulvestrant and anastrozole.
After 6 days of treatment, cell viability was analysed using cell titre glo and data expressed
as fold-change relative to vehicle treated control. Error bars represent ± SEM. (D) Colony
forming assay of MCF7 and MCF7-LTED, following treatment with AZD5363 in the
presence or absence of endocrine agents. Cells were left for 14 days with treatment
changes every 3-4 days.
Figure 3. Effect of the combination of AZD5363 with E-deprivation (DCC), 4-OHT or
fulvestrant on PI3K/mTOR/AKT, ER and cell cycle signalling. (A) Schematic
representation of the AKT signalling pathway and cross-talk with RTKs and ER.
Endocrine resistant and sensitive breast cancer cell lines were treated for 48-hours with the
drug combinations indicated to assess (B) effect on PI3K/AKT/mTOR and ER pathways
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
32
and (C) cell cycle. Cyclin D3 was assessed for MCF7 derived cell lines, whilst Cyclin D1
was tested in the remaining cell lines.
Figure 4. Effect of the combination of AZD5363 with E-deprivation (DCC), 4-OHT or
fulvestrant on (A) RTK expression, (B) ER-mediated transactivation and (C)
recruitment of the ER-transcriptional machinery to the TFF1, GREB1 and PGR
promoters in response to AZD5363 in the absence of exogenous E2. (A) Endocrine
resistant and sensitive BC cell lines were treated for 48-hours with the drug combinations
indicated. Whole-cell extracts were assessed for expression on RTK markers by
immunoblotting. (B) Cell lines were co-transfected with EREIItkLuc and pCH110, and
treated for 24-hours with the drug combinations indicated. Luciferase activity was
normalized by β-galactosidase from triplicate wells and fold-changes expressed relative to
the DCC control. Error bars represent ± SEM. *p<0.05; **p<0.01; ***p<0.001. (C)
MCF7-LTED cells were treated for 24-hours in DCC in the presence or absence of
AZD5363 and ER/CBP binding to TFF1, GREB1 and PgR assessed via chromatin
immunoprecipitation studies. Error bars represent ± SEM. *p<0.05; **p<0.01; ***p<0.001.
Figure 5. Effect of AZD5363 alone or in combination with fulvestrant on biomarker
changes and tumour progression in HBCx22OvaR. (A) Long-term study assessing
changes in tumour volume over 90-days of treatment and (B) assessment of tumour
volume post drug withdrawal. PD study performed for 4-day was conducted to assess
biomarker changes in (C) protein expression of pertinent targets within the
PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway and ER-signalling via measurement of PgR expression by
semi-quantitative western blotting and (D) mRNA analysis of ER-regulated, cell cycle and
apoptosis target genes using Fluidigm heatmap shows Log2 expression of samples
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
33
extracted 2 and 4-hours after final administration of AZD5363. Bars represent ± SEM.
*p<0.05; **p<0.01; ***p<0.001
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
Fig. 1
A
PTEN
PI3KCA
HER2
Mutation
WT HER2 (RNA expression)
A HER2-amplified
A
B
AZD5363 structure
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
0
150
300
450
600
750
0 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Re
lati
ve L
um
ine
sce
nce
(X
10
00
)
fulvestrant (nM)
0
100
200
300
400
0 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Re
lati
ve L
um
ine
sce
nce
(X
10
00
)
fulvestrant (nM)
0
200
400
600
800
0 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Re
lati
ve L
um
ine
sce
nce
(X
10
00
)
fulvestrant (nM)
0
100
200
300
400
0 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Re
lati
ve L
um
ine
sce
nce
(X
10
00
)
fulvestrant (nM)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Re
lati
ve L
um
ine
sce
nce
(X
10
00
)
4-OHT (nM)
0
200
400
600
800
0 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Re
lati
ve L
um
ine
sce
nce
(X
10
00
)
4-OHT (nM)
MCF7- 2A
A
B
C
-AZD5363
+AZD5363
BT474 A3
MCF7 LTED ZR75 LTED T47D LTED TamR
MCF7 ZR75 T47D 1% MCF7
MCF7 LTED ZR75 LTED T47D LTED TamR
MCF7 ZR75 T47D 1% MCF7
Fig. 2
0
400
800
1200
1600
0 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Re
lati
ve L
um
ine
sce
nce
(X
10
00
)
fulvestrant (nM)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Re
lati
ve L
um
ine
sce
nce
(X
10
00
)
Anastrozole (nM)
0
100
200
300
400
500
Re
lati
ve L
um
ine
sce
nce
(X
10
00
)
Anastrozole (nM)
0
100
200
300
400
0 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Re
lati
ve L
um
ine
sce
nce
(X
10
00
)
4-OHT (nM)
0
100
200
300
400
0 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Re
lati
ve lu
min
esc
en
ce
(X1
00
0)
4-OHT (nM)
0
400
800
1200
1600
0 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Re
lati
ve L
um
ine
sce
nce
(X
10
00
)
4-OHT (nM)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Re
lati
ve L
um
ine
sce
nce
(X
10
00
)
4-OHT (nM)
0
150
300
450
600
750
0 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Re
lati
ve L
um
ine
sce
nce
(X
10
00
)
4-OHT (nM)
0
200
400
600
800
0 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Re
lati
ve L
um
ine
sce
nce
(X
10
00
)
4-OHT (nM)
0
150
300
450
600
750
0 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Re
lati
ve L
um
ine
sce
nce
(X
10
00
)
fulvestrant (nM)
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Re
lati
ve L
um
ine
sce
nce
(X
10
00
)
fulvestrant (nM)
0
150
300
450
600
750
0 0.01 0.1 1 10 100
Re
lati
ve lu
min
esc
en
ce
(X1
00
0)
fulvestrant (nM)
D
MC
F7
MC
F7-L
TED
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
MCF7 MCF7 LTED T47D T47D LTED ZR75 ZR75 LTED TamR
4EBP1
ER
pERK1/2
pPRAS40 (T246)
pAKT (S473)
S6RP
pAKT (T308)
pER (S167)
pRaf (S259)
Raf
AKT
ERK1/2
PRAS40
pS6RP (S235/236)
14-3-3
Actin
pRaf (S338)
p4EBP1 (T37/46)
PgR
pP70S6K (T389)
P70S6K
AZD5363 (1000nM)
E2 (0.01nM)
4-OHT (10nM)
fulvestrant (1nM)
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
+
+
-
-
+
-
+
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
+
+
-
-
+
-
+
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
+
+
-
-
+
-
+
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
+
+
-
-
+
-
+
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
+
+
-
-
+
-
+
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
+
+
-
-
+
-
+
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
+
-
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
+
Fig. 3
A
B
pRb (S807)
Rb
Parp total/Cleavage
Cyclin D1/D3
Actin
C
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
0
1
2
3
4
ERE
luci
fera
se a
ctiv
ity
fo
ld c
han
ge
T47D
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
ERE
luci
fera
se a
ctiv
ity
fo
ld c
han
ge
MCF7
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
3.5
ERE
luci
fera
se a
ctiv
ity
fo
ld c
han
ge
MCF7 LTED
**
***
**
**
**
** **
**
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
ERE
luci
fera
se a
ctiv
ity
fo
ld c
han
ge
TamR
* **
*
* * 0
2
4
6
8
10
12
ERE
luci
fera
se a
ctiv
ity
f
old
ch
ange
ZR75 B
A
**
Fig. 4
AZD5363 (1000nM)
fulvestrant (1nM)
4-OHT (10nM)
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
+
+
-
-
+
-
+
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
E2 (0.01nM)
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
+
+
-
-
+
-
+
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
+
+
-
-
+
-
+
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
AZD5363 (1000nM)
fulvestrant (10nM)
4-OHT (10nM)
-
-
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
-
+
-
AZD5363 (1000nM)
fulvestrant (1nM)
4-OHT (10nM)
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
+
+
-
-
+
-
+
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
E2 (0.01nM)
AZD5363 (1000nM)
E2 (0.01nM)
4-OHT (10nM)
fulvestrant (1nM)
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
+
+
-
-
+
-
+
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
+
+
-
-
+
-
+
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
+
+
-
-
+
-
+
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
+
+
-
-
+
-
+
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
+
+
-
-
+
-
+
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
-
+
+
-
+
+
+
-
-
+
-
+
+
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
-
-
-
-
-
+
-
+
-
+
-
-
-
-
+
+
-
-
+
p-ERBBB2
p-EGFR
EGFR
pERBB3
pERBB4
ERBB2
ERBB3
ERBB4
IGF-1R
IRS1
IRS2
Actin
MCF7 MCF7 LTED T47D T47D LTED ZR75 ZR75 LTED TamR
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
IgG AIB1 CBP ER IgG AIB1 CBP ER
DCC DCC+AZD5363
% o
f In
pu
t (T
FF1
)
TFF1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
IgG AIB1 CBP ER IgG AIB1 CBP ER
DCC DCC+AZD5363
% o
f in
pu
t (G
REB
1)
GREB1 C
** ** **
* **
**
0
10
20
30
40
IgG AIB1 CBP ER IgG AIB1 CBP ER
DCC DCC+AZD5363
% o
f In
pu
t (P
gR)
PGR
* *
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
pAKT(S
473)
pAKT(T
308)
pPRAS40
(T24
6)
PGR
p4EBP1(
T37/4
6)0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
Bio
ma
rke
r S
ign
al (%
co
ntr
ol)
Vehicle 4hrs
Fulvestrant 4hrs
AZD5363 2 hrs
AZD5363 4 hrs
AZD5363+Fulvestrant 2 hrs
AZD5363+Fulvestrant 4 hrs
Fig. 5
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100110120130140150
Rela
tive T
um
or
Vo
lum
e
Days after start of treatment
AZD5363
stop
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100110120130140150
Rela
tive T
um
or
Vo
lum
e
Days after start of treatment
AZD5363 + Fulvestrant
stop
A
C D
B
ER dependent transcription
Apoptotic/ cell cycle related transcription
Fulv
4h
AZD5363
2h
AZD5363+Fulv
2h
AZD5363
4h
AZD5363+Fulv
4h CXCL12
C3
TFF1
MYBL1
GREB1
IGF1R
PGR
SPRY1
ZEB1
GATA3
MUC1
LAMB2
ESR1
RET
TFF3
AQP3
AREG
Fulv
4h
AZD5363
2h
AZD5363+Fulv
2h
AZD5363
4h
AZD5363+Fulv
4h
CCND1
CASP9
CCNG2
BMF
**
**
***
**
*
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143
Published OnlineFirst June 26, 2015.Mol Cancer Ther Ricardo Ribas, Sunil Pancholi, Stephanie K. Guest, et al. fulvestrant (ICI182780) in vivoin endocrine resistant breast cancer and synergises with AKT antagonist AZD5363 influences estrogen receptor function
Updated version
10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143doi:
Access the most recent version of this article at:
Material
Supplementary
http://mct.aacrjournals.org/content/suppl/2015/06/25/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143.DC1
Access the most recent supplemental material at:
Manuscript
Authoredited. Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been
E-mail alerts related to this article or journal.Sign up to receive free email-alerts
Subscriptions
Reprints and
To order reprints of this article or to subscribe to the journal, contact the AACR Publications
Permissions
Rightslink site. Click on "Request Permissions" which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center's (CCC)
.http://mct.aacrjournals.org/content/early/2015/06/25/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143To request permission to re-use all or part of this article, use this link
on June 15, 2020. © 2015 American Association for Cancer Research. mct.aacrjournals.org Downloaded from
Author manuscripts have been peer reviewed and accepted for publication but have not yet been edited. Author Manuscript Published OnlineFirst on June 26, 2015; DOI: 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-15-0143