MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405051936 · doi:10.1182/blood-2024-201980

Targeting PRMT5-Mediated DNA Repair Pathway in Extra-Nodal NK/T-Cell Lymphoma (ENKTL)

2024· article· en· W4405051936 on OpenAlexaff
Youssef Youssef, Walter Hanel, Wing Keung Chan, Fiona C. Brown, Claire Hinterschied, Jobeth Helmig-Mason, Neha Bhagwat, Kris Vaddi, Peggy Scherle, Aharon G. Freud, Lapo Alinari, Christopher C. Oakes, Bethany L. Mundy-Bosse, Robert A. Baiocchi

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer-related gene regulation
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsT-cell lymphomaLymphomaCancer researchBiologyMedicineImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Extra-Nodal (NK)/T-cell Lymphoma (ENKTL) is the most common subtype of NK lymphoma derived from EBV-infected NK cells. ENKTL is incurable and the 5-year survival is around 40% (<10% if disseminated) highlighting the unmet need for novel therapies. It has been shown that upregulation of DNA damage repair (DDR) plays a pivotal role in ENKTL survival by promoting genomic stability and resistance to lymphoma conventional DNA damaging therapies as reflected by the limited response rate (<50%). We identified protein arginine methyltransferase (PRMT5) to be oncogenic in many malignancies by supporting the cell cycle, WNT, and PI3K/AKT pathways. PRMT5, also promotes DDR through RNA splicing of TIP60/KAT5 and stabilization of 53BP1, essential for homologous recombination (HR) and non-homologous end joining (NHEJ), respectively. PRMT5-deficiency leads to DNA damage accumulation, cell cycle arrest, and apoptosis. Unbiased analysis of our RNA-seq data on ENKTL patient samples (n=22) show significant upregulation of DDR genes compared to normal NK cells. Interestingly, we also detected PRMT5 overexpression in 95% of this ENKTL cohort by RNA-seq, suggesting that PRMT5 may also be playing a role in the DDR within ENKTL. We confirmed these RNA-seq data and detected PRMT5 overexpression in primary ENKTL patients' samples (n=10) by immunohistochemical (IHC) staining compared to normal tonsils (n=5), in ENKTL-cell lines (NKL, NK92, and YT) and in a patient-derived xenograft (PDX) mouse model of ENKTL (ENKTL1) by western-blot. We hypothesize that PRMT5 inhibition 1) targets DNA repair in ENKTL cells leading to increased DNA damage-induced cell death and 2) sensitizes ENKTL cells to other DNA damage-inducing agents used in the current treatment of ENKTL leading to substantial increases in DNA damage-mediated cell death with combination therapy. To address this hypothesis, we used selective PRMT5-inhibitors, PRT382 and PRT808 (Prelude-Therapeutics) and detected cytotoxicity (IC50 25 - 500nM) in ENKTL-cell lines and ENKTL1. Furthermore, PRT382 significantly prolonged overall survival (OS) in our in vivo PDX mouse model of ENKTL1 (median OS: control 43 days vs PRT382 65 days; p=0.0088). Mechanistically, accumulation of DNA-damage was evident by the increase in phosphorylated forms of 1) H2AX (H2A histone family member X) at Ser139, and 2) Chk1/Chk2 (major DNA check points control) at Ser317/Ser345 and Thr68, respectively, in PRT808-treated cells and upon PRMT5 knock-down. Lastly, PRT808 sensitized NK-lymphoma cells to killing by doxorubicin (DNA-damage agent) and Olaparib (PARP1/2-inhibitor, key regulator of HR). In conclusion, PRMT5-inhibition results in an unrepairable level of DNA damage/subsequent apoptosis and sensitizes NK-lymphoma to other DNA damage-inducing agents. All together, these data justify targeting PRMT5 in ENKTL, as a single agent and in combination with other DNA damage agents which are an essential part of the current ENKTL regimen (Doxorubicin and Etoposide) representing a novel approach for better outcome. Further mechanistic studies investigating the role of PRMT5 in DNA repair and DNA damage in ENKTL cells are ongoing.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.756

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.200 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicCancer-related gene regulationFrench-language works237,207