GSK-3 Spatial Regulation Has an Essential Role in Lenalidomide Activity and Represents a Biomarker of Clinical Response in CLL
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Abstract 1793 Thalidomide (THAL) and IMID® immunomodulary drugs lenalidomide (LEN) and (POM) have proven beneficial in the treatment of a variety of hematological malignancies. Pre-clinical studies demonstrate multiple direct and indirect anti-tumor activities including anti-angiogeneic, proapoptotic, anti-proliferative and immunomodulatory effects. Recent studies have identified cerebron (CRBN) as a potential direct physical target of THAL and IMiD compounds and CRBN expression is reportedly required for IMiD compound activity. However, the precise link between CRBN and IMiD compound mechanism of action (MOA) have not been clearly defined. We applied Drosophila as a drug discovery platform to assess the MOA of THAL and IMiD compounds in vivo. THAL or POM fed Drosophila demonstrate morphological phenotypes that replicate wingless (wg) mutants indicating that drugs are inhibitors of Wg/Wnt signaling. In this model system, THAL and IMiD compounds disrupt membrane localization of GSK-3 indicating that the bioactivity of IMiD compounds is achieved through spatial regulation and potentiation of Sgg/GSK-3 in Drosophila. Using epistasis analysis we show that Drosophila expressing genetic mutants lacking GSK-3 activity and myeloma cells in which GSK-3a and GSK-3b have been knocked down by siRNA fail to respond to POM. In both Drosophila and myeloma cells therefore it appears that GSK-3 activity is required for biological responses. To test the clinical validity of GSK-3 as a biomarker, we obtained patient tumor samples from a Phase II clinical trial of single agent LEN for previously untreated CLL (Chen CI et al., J Clin Oncol, 2011; 29:1175). Twenty five patients were enrolled onto this study and received LEN at a starting dose of 2.5 mg days 1–21 of a 28 day cycle with monthly escalation to a target dose of 10 mg. The primary clinical endpoint for the trial was objective response to lenalidomide (complete response (CR) and partial response (PR)) evaluated as defined in the revised 1996 NCI Working Group guidelines. Peripheral blood samples for correlative studies were collected on days 1 (pre-dosing) and 8 of cycles 1 and 2. CRBN expression was evaluated by gene expression profiling and Western blot and found to be uniformly expressed in all 19 evaluable day 1 patient samples regardless of LEN response. Thus CRBN expression does not appear to be a useful predictive biomarker of response in this population of previously untreated patients. However, GSK-3 localization was correlated with response. Paired analysis of CD19 selected CLL cells comparing day 1 vs day 8 revealed focal membrane localization of GSK-3 on day 1 and subcellular redistribution on day 8 in 11 out of 12 evaluable responders (PR or better). By contrast, in the CLL cells from all 6 evaluable non-responders, GSK-3 expression appeared diffusely distributed before and after treatment. In preliminary studies using confocal immunofluorescence microscopy we determined that CRBN and GSK-3 co-localize in day 1 CLL samples of responders but not in those of non-responders. In summary, our results indicate that THAL and the IMiD compounds target GSK-3 function by spatial regulation and identify GSK-3 localization as a potential clinical biomarker of IMiD response. Disclosures: Trudel: Celgene: Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria. Mercurio:Celgene: Equity Ownership, Research Funding. Lopez-Girona:Celgene Corp: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gaidarova:Celgene Corp: Employment, Equity Ownership. Webb:Celgene: Employment, Equity Ownership. Chen:Johnson & Johnson: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; GlaxoSmithKline: Research Funding; Lundbeck: Consultancy. Stewart:Millenium: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Manoukian:Celgene: Research Funding.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".