MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Novel potent and selective inhibitors targeting FLT3 for AML therapy.

2025· article· en· W4410809231 on OpenAlexaff
Gauthier Errasti, Thomas Delacroix, Kalpana Ghoshal, Robert J. Lee, Anisha Ghosh, Raj Chakrabarti

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myeloid Leukemia Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLapatinibPharmacologyCancer researchCancerTrastuzumabInternal medicineBreast cancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

6542 Background: Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) is a malignancy frequently driven by mutations in the FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3) gene. The FLT3 internal tandem duplication (ITD) and tyrosine kinase domain (TKD) mutations, particularly D835 and F691, appear in approximately 30% of AML patients, often leading to poor prognosis and resistance to existing therapies. Gilteritinib and Quizartinib are two FDA-approved FLT3 inhibitors, with the former approved only for relapsed/refractory AML and the latter approved only for newly diagnosed AML. Quizartinib does not target TKD resistance mutations, whereas Gilteritinib’s efficacy on FLT3-ITD-D835Y is limited and it is not effective against FLT3-ITD-F691L. Consequently, there is a critical need for next-generation FLT3 inhibitors that can address all of these mutations. Methods: We have characterized efficacy of two novel FLT3 inhibitors, CCM-405 and CCM-445. In vitro enzymatic binding affinities were determined by the KdELECT assay, and cellular IC 50 s were determined by the Cell-Titer Glo assay. In vivo antitumor activity of CCM-405 / 445 was evaluated in mutant cell line-derived xenograft (CDX) models of AML. Tumor growth inhibition (TGI) was measured in the FLT3-ITD luciferase-expressing MV4-11 (MV4-11-luc) systemic xenograft model as well as subcutaneous xenograft models of FLT3-ITD F691L and D835Y mutants. Efficacy of novel inhibitors was compared with Gilteritinib. In vitro efficacy was compared with experimental FLT3 TKD mutant inhibitor Luxeptinib. Results: Enzymatically, CCM-405 / 445 inhibit FLT3-ITD, FLT3-ITD-D835V and FLT3-ITD-F691L with K d s of 12 nM / 4.1 nM, 1.9 nM / 0.39 nM and 1.6 nM / 0.4 nM, respectively (Luxeptinib K d s: ITD-D835V: 550 nM; ITD-F691L: 97 nM). CCM-405 / 445 inhibit the proliferation of Ba/F3 FLT3-ITD and FLT3-ITD D835Y cell lines with potency comparable to Gilteritinib, and FLT3-ITD F691L with potency superior to Gilteritinib, and are significantly less toxic to Ba/F3 FLT3 WT than to the mutants (Luxeptinib: negligible cellular mutant/WT selectivity). CCM-405 / 445 are also potent against human AML cell lines MV4-11 and MOLM-13. In vivo , in the systemic FLT3-ITD model, CCM-405 induced ~90% tumor regression (> 100% TGI) and was significantly more effective than Gilteritinib (p < 0.001), which did not regress the tumor, when these agents were administered orally at doses corresponding to equal fractions of their maximum tolerated doses (MTDs). In both FLT3-ITD-F691L and FLT3-ITD-D835Y CDX models, CCM-405 induced almost complete tumor regression (>100% TGI). Both novel inhibitors were significantly more efficacious than Gilteritinib (45% and 4% TGI, respectively). Conclusions: Novel FLT3 inhibitors have been developed that can both target FLT3-ITD and potentially overcome mutational resistance to FDA-approved FLT3 inhibitors. These agents are significantly more effective than Gilteritinib and have potential clinical applications.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.106
GPT teacher head0.491
Teacher spread0.385 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicAcute Myeloid Leukemia ResearchFrench-language works237,207