Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
BCR::ABL1 is the oncogenic driver of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) and Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph + ) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), with BCR::ABL1 p210 and p190 being the predominant isoforms. Asciminib, an inhibitor that specifically targets the ABL myristate pocket (STAMP), has demonstrated efficacy in both pre-clinical and clinical studies against p210-driven CML, including cases where resistance mediated by ATP-pocket mutations has developed during prior tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy. The resistant mutation profile of asciminib is currently considered largely distinct from that of ATP-competitive TKIs. In our study, we demonstrate that several ATP-pocket mutations, including the V299L, F311I, T315I, and F317C/L, confer high levels of resistance to asciminib in the p190 isoform (> 1000-fold increase in LD 50 asciminib values compared to non-mutated BCR::ABL1 p190), but remain sensitive when occurring in the p210 isoform. The T315A was the only tested mutation in BCR::ABL1 p190 sensitive to asciminib. Furthermore, cells expressing BCR::ABL1 p190 mutations exhibited decreased kinase inhibition following STAMP treatment, indicative of an active kinase. Analogous results were obtained for MK-4208 (formerly known as TERN-701), a clinically active investigational STAMP compound. In the BCR::ABL1 p190 setting, this work reveals an overlapping resistance profile between STAMP compounds and TKIs, with important considerations for STAMP-based therapy. It challenges two key assumptions: that asciminib dose escalation can overcome resistant ATP-pocket mutations and that targeted therapy sensitivity profiles are equivalent between the p190 and p210 isoforms.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lagonik et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: