Abstract 3829: NEO1132 and NEO2734, novel dual bromodomain inhibitors of both BET and CREBBP/EP300, compared to single BET or CREBB/EP300 inhibitors in diffuse large B cell lymphoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Lymphoma cells have frequent deregulation of their epigenome. The Bromodomain (BRD) and Extra-Terminal domain (BET) proteins are key regulators of the transcription process. The acetyltransferases cyclic AMP response element binding protein (CREB)-binding protein (CBP) and the E1A interacting protein of 300 kDa (EP300) are highly homologous BRD-containing transcriptional co-activators and are often mutated in diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Targeting the individual classes of proteins is a new therapeutic approach, with BET inhibitors having both preclinical and early clinical anti-lymphoma activity. NEO2734 and NEO1132 are novel chemically distinct dual inhibitors of both BET and CREBBP/EP300 proteins with different affinity for their targets. Here, we present initial data exploring their anti-tumor activity in DLBCL models. Lymphoma cell lines were exposed to increasing doses of compounds for 72h followed by MTT assay. Twenty-seven DLBCL cell lines were exposed to NEO2734 and NEO1132. NEO2734 showed anti-tumor activity with a median IC50 of 157 nM (95% C.I., 135-214). While, NEO1132 showed a lower activity compared to NEO2734, with a median IC50 of 400nM (95% C.I., 316-622). For both compounds, cell lines derived from activated B-cell-like (ABC) DLBCL (n.=8) were more sensitive than those derived from germinal center B-cell (GCB) DLBCL (n.=19) (P=0.009, P=0.03 respectively). No differences were observed based on double hit MYC/BCL2 (yes, n.=6; no, n.=14), MYC (translocation: yes, n=8; no, n.=13), BCL2 (translocation: yes, n=12; no, n.=6), TP53 (inactive: yes, n=14; no, n.=6), CREBBP (mutated, n.=10; wild type, n=16), or EP300 (mutated, n.=5; wild type, n.=20) gene status. All the cell lines were also exposed to a BET inhibitor (birabresib, OTX015) (Boi et al, Clinical Cancer Res 2015) and to a CREBBP/EP300 inhibitor (CBP30) (Hammitzsch et al, PNAS 2015). The median IC50 values of the two molecules were 237 nM (95% C.I., 171-344) and 5.5 μM (95% C.I., 4.2-8.3 μM) respectively. The four compounds presented a similar pattern of anti-proliferative activity across all the cell lines (NEO2734 vs NEO1132 R2=0.98, P < 0.001; NEO2734 vs birabresib: R2=0.84, P < 0.001; NEO2734 vs CBP30, R2 = 0.73, P < 0.001; birabresib vs CBP30, R2 = 0.73, P < 0.001) but with different degrees of IC50. NEO2734 was significantly more potent than birabresib (P=0.0182), CBP30 (P<0.001) and NEO1132 (P<0.001). The higher activity of NEO2734 compared to NEO1132 may be attributable to its superior potency in binding CREBBP and EP300, confirming the importance of the BET/CREBBP/EP300 simultaneous inhibition. The novel dual BET and CREBBP/EP300 inhibitors NEO2734 and NEO1132 showed potent in vitro anti-tumor activity across a large panel of DLBCL cell lines and their activity appear to be proportional to the binding affinity for both BET and CREBBP/EP300 proteins. Citation Format: Filippo Spriano, Eugenio Gaudio, Chiara Tarantelli, Gaetanina Golino, Luciano Cascione, Emanuele Zucca, Anastasios Stathis, Francis Giles, Francesco Bertoni. NEO1132 and NEO2734, novel dual bromodomain inhibitors of both BET and CREBBP/EP300, compared to single BET or CREBB/EP300 inhibitors in diffuse large B cell lymphoma [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2019; 2019 Mar 29-Apr 3; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 3829.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".