MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2565035265 · doi:10.1182/blood.v120.21.2445.2445

Next-Generation STAT3 Inhibitors As Targeted Therapeutics in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia.

2012· article· en· W2565035265 sur OpenAlexaff
Ira L. Kraft, Anna M. Eiring, Brent D. G. Page, Clinton C. Mason, Zhimin Gu, Jamshid S. Khorashad, David J. Anderson, Anthony D. Pomicter, Kimberly R. Reynolds, Johanna Estrada, Matthew S. Zabriskie, Patrick T. Gunning, Thomas O’Hare, Michael W. Deininger

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2012
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueChronic Myeloid Leukemia Treatments
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Toronto
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésImatinibMyeloid leukemiaCancer researchSTAT3Tyrosine-kinase inhibitorK562 cellsImatinib mesylateMedicineLeukemiaPharmacologyBiologyImmunologySignal transductionInternal medicineCancerCell biology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 2445 Constitutive activation of signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) correlates with drug resistance and a poor prognosis in many cancers. STAT3 signaling is mediated by phosphorylation at tyrosine-705 (p STAT3Y705), dimerization, and nuclear transactivation. In chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), pSTAT3Y705 is demonstrable under two distinct resistance scenarios: (1) extrinsic resistance, in which BCR-ABL1 kinase-independent survival signals originating from the bone marrow (BM) microenvironment activate pSTAT3Y705 in a JAK2- or TYK2-dependent manner, and (2) intrinsic resistance, in which BCR-ABL1 kinase-independent signals activate pSTAT3Y705 in response to kinase inhibition. Based on these observations, we identified TKI-resistant CML as an excellent model for developing and optimizing pharmacologic STAT3 inhibitors. Using K562 and AR230 CML cells that are resistant to 1 μM imatinib (K562R and AR230R; intrinsic resistance) and primary CML CD34+ progenitor cells exposed to BM stromal-derived conditioned medium (CM; extrinsic resistance), we examined the effects of direct pharmacologic inhibition of STAT3 in TKI-resistant CML. Here, we report the design and validation of next-generation STAT3 inhibitors identified through computational modeling and screening in AR230R CML cells expressing high levels of pSTAT3Y705. We initially examined the effects of an established STAT3 inhibitor, S3I-201.1066 (SF1–066). K562R or AR230R cells were treated with 1 μM imatinib and/or 10 μM SF1–066, followed by culture in methylcellulose medium and scoring after 14–16 days. Combination treatment reduced the clonogenicity of K562R and AR230R cells to 31.4% (p<0.02) and 27.5% (p<0.004) of controls, respectively. In contrast, SF1–066 did not synergize with imatinib in parental K562 and AR230 cells that lack constitutive pSTAT3Y705 (p>0.05). Next, CD34+ cells from newly diagnosed CML patients (n=4) were cultured for 96 hours in the presence of CM and treated with 2.5 μM imatinib, 10 μM SF1–066 or both. Equal numbers of cells were then plated in colony forming assays. Imatinib combined with SF1–066 reduced colony formation to 54.8% (p<0.002) of controls treated with imatinib. Given that dual treatment reduces but does not completely suppress colony formation, we reasoned that some STAT3 signaling must persist in the presence of SF1–066. Thus, we developed next-generation STAT3 inhibitors with increased activity compared to SF1–066. Computational modeling informed the design and synthesis of a second-generation, SF1–066-based library. We evaluated compounds with shared molecular functionalities using AR230R cells expressing a luciferase reporter containing sequential STAT3 sis-inducible elements (AR230R-SIE). At 10 μM, we found two inhibitors, BP2–047 and BP3–163, that reduced luminescence by 69.2% (p<3.6×10−6) and 59.7% (p<8.6×10−6), respectively, compared to controls (n=3). However, the compounds also reduced luminescence in AR230R cells expressing a scrambled luciferase reporter (AR230R-NEG). This screen provided information on the structure-activity relationships of the compounds and was used to generate 64 more candidate STAT3 inhibitors. To account for the reduced luminescence in AR230R-NEG cells and analyze for more potent inhibitors, we performed the luciferase assay with candidate inhibitors at 5 μM. We identified BP5–087 and BP5–088, each with increased potency and STAT3 selectivity compared to SF1–066. These compounds decreased luminescence in AR230R-SIE cells by 36.1% (p<2.6×10−7) and 25.5% (p<6.1×10−10), respectively (n=3), with minimal effects on AR230R-NEG cells (p>0.05). Confirmation of STAT3 binding was obtained using fluorescence polarization assays, in which the EC50 values of BP5–087 and BP5–088 measured 8.5 μM and 4.6 μM, respectively. Studies with mouse and human liver microsomes also revealed that BP5–087 and BP5–088 exhibit enhanced metabolic stability compared to SF1–066. Interestingly, treatment with BP5–087 or BP5–088 (both at 1 and 5 μM) in CML CD34+ progenitors grown in CM showed increased cytoplasmic accumulation of pSTAT3Y705 compared to controls. Thus, we identified BP5–087 and BP5–088 as two of the most potent small-molecule binders of STAT3 reported. These compounds are promising frontrunners toward new therapies for TKI-resistant CML and other diseases in which STAT3 activation drives malignant phenotypes. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: Expérimental (laboratoire)
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,001
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,004

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,039
Tête enseignante GPT0,283
Écart entre enseignants0,243 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2012
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetChronic Myeloid Leukemia TreatmentsTravaux en français237 207