This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
Luminal Androgen Receptor (LAR) triple-negative breast cancers (TNBC) express androgen receptors (AR), exhibit high frequency of PIK3CA mutations and intact RB . Herein, we investigated combined blockade of the CDK4/6 and PI3K signaling with palbociclib , alpelisib , and capivasertib , which inhibit CDK4/6, PI3Kα, and AKT1-3, respectively. The combination of palbociclib/capivasertib, but not palbociclib/alpelisib, synergistically inhibited proliferation of MDA-MB-453 and MFM-223 LAR cells [synergy score 7.34 (p = 5.81x10 −11 ) and 4.78 (p = 0.012), respectively]. The AR antagonist enzalutamide was inactive against MDA-MB-453, MFM-223, and CAL148 cells and did not enhance the efficacy of either combination. Palbociclib/capivasertib inhibited growth of LAR patient-derived xenografts more potently than palbociclib/alpelisib. Treatment of LAR cells with palbociclib suppressed phosphorylated-RB and resulted in adaptive phosphorylation/activation of S473 pAKT and AKT substrates GSK3β, PRAS40, and FoxO3a. Capivasertib blocked palbociclib-induced phosphorylation of AKT substrates more potently than alpelisib . Treatment with PI3Kβ inhibitors did not block phosphorylation of AKT substrates, suggesting that PI3Kβ did not mediate the adaptive response to CDK4/6 inhibition. Phosphokinase arrays of MDA-MB-453 cells treated with palbociclib showed time-dependent upregulation of PDGFRβ, GSK3β, STAT3 , and STAT6 . RNA silencing of PDGFRβ in palbociclib-treated MDA-MB-453 and MFM-223 cells blocked the upregulation of S473 pAKT, suggesting that the adaptive response to CDK4/6 blockade involves PDGFRβ signaling. Finally, treatment with palbociclib and the PDGFR inhibitor CP637451 arrested growth of MDA-MB-453 and MFM-223 cells to the same degree as palbociclib/capivasertib. These findings support testing the combination of CDK4/6 and AKT inhibitors in patients with LAR TNBC, and further investigation of PDGFR antagonists in this breast cancer subtype.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chica-Parrado et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: