Mechanistic target of rapamycin (mTOR) is a protein kinase regulating cell growth, survival, metabolism, and immunity. mTOR is usually assembled into several complexes such as mTOR complex 1/2 (mTORC1/2). In cooperation with raptor, rictor, LST8, and mSin1, key components in mTORC1 or mTORC2, mTOR catalyzes the phosphorylation of multiple targets such as ribosomal protein S6 kinase β-1 (S6K1), eukaryotic translation initiation factor 4E binding protein 1 (4E-BP1), Akt, protein kinase C (PKC), and type-I insulin-like growth factor receptor (IGF-IR), thereby regulating protein synthesis, nutrients metabolism, growth factor signaling, cell growth, and migration. Activation of mTOR promotes tumor growth and metastasis. Many mTOR inhibitors have been developed to treat cancer. While some of the mTOR inhibitors have been approved to treat human cancer, more mTOR inhibitors are being evaluated in clinical trials. Here, we update recent advances in exploring mTOR signaling and the development of mTOR inhibitors for cancer therapy. In addition, we discuss the mechanisms underlying the resistance to mTOR inhibitors in cancer cells.

/pdf/targeting-mtor-for-cancer-therapy-21n99gutyp.pdf

Targeting mTOR for cancer therapy

The RAS-RAF-MEK-ERK signaling cascade is among the most frequently mutated pathways in human cancer. Approximately 50% of melanoma patients possess a druggable hotspot V600E/K mutation in the BRAF protein kinase. FDA-approved combination therapies of BRAF and MEK inhibitors are available that provide survival benefits to patients with a BRAF V600 mutation. Non-V600 BRAF mutants are found in many cancers, and are more prevalent than V600 mutations in certain tumor types. For example, between 50-80% of BRAF mutations in non-small cell lung cancer and 22-30% in colorectal cancer encode for non-V600 mutants. As next generation sequencing becomes increasingly used in clinical practice, oncologists are frequently identifying non-V600 BRAF mutations in their patient's tumors, but are uncertain of viable therapeutic options that could be employed for optimal treatment. From recent studies, a new classification system is emerging for BRAF mutations based on biochemical and signaling mechanisms associated with these mutants. Class I BRAF mutations affect amino acid V600 and signal as RAS-independent active monomers, class II mutations function as RAS-independent activated dimers, and class III mutations are kinase impaired but increase signaling through the MAPK pathway due to enhanced RAS binding and subsequent CRAF activation. These distinct classes of BRAF mutations predict response to targeted therapies and have important implications for future drug development. Herein, we discuss pre-clinical and clinical findings that may lead to improved treatments for all classes of BRAF mutant cancers.

Classifying BRAF alterations in cancer: new rational therapeutic strategies for actionable mutations.

Genomic, Pathway Network, and Immunologic Features Distinguishing Squamous Carcinomas

PROBLEM TO BE SOLVED: To provide a technique for quantifying circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) which is a somatic mutation with high sensitivity from a cancer patient's living body sample, and to provide diagnosis, prognosis diagnosis, a therapeutic agent, and a technique for monitoring of cancer based on it.SOLUTION: In a test sample of blood or stool of a cancer patient, the copy number of DNA fragments by a gene mutation is measured, and if the mutation is present in tumor tissue of the cancer patients but not in normal tissue of the patient, the copy number is an index of the tumor burden in the patient.SELECTED DRAWING: None

Circulating mutant dna to assess tumor dynamics

Phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) pathway inhibitors in solid tumors: From laboratory to patients.

Introduction This Phase Ib trial investigated the safety, tolerability, and recommended phase 2 dose for the pan-PI3K/mTOR inhibitor, GSK2126458 (GSK458), and trametinib combination when administered to patients with advanced solid tumors. Patients and Methods Patients with advanced solid tumors received escalating doses of GSK458 (once or twice daily, and continuous or intermittent) and trametinib following a zone-based 3 + 3 design to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Assessments included monitoring for adverse events and response, and evaluating pharmacokinetic (PK) measures. Archival tissue and circulating free DNA samples were collected to assess biomarkers of response in the PI3K and RAS pathways. Results 57 patients were enrolled onto the continuous dosing cohort and 12 patients onto an intermittent BID dosing cohort. Two MTDs were established for the continuous daily dosing: 2 mg of GSK458 with 1.0 mg of trametinib or 1.0 mg of GSK458 with 1.5 mg of trametinib; no MTD was determined in the intermittent dosing cohort. The most frequent adverse events were rash (74 %) and diarrhea (61 %). Dose interruptions due to adverse events occurred in 42 % of patients. No significant PK interaction was observed. One patient achieved partial response and 12 patients had stable disease >16 weeks. Mutations in RAS/RAF/PI3K were detected in 70 % of patients, but no pattern emerged between response and mutational status. Conclusion GSK458 plus trametinib is poorly tolerated, due to skin and GI-related toxicities. Responses were minimal, despite enrichment for PI3K/RAS pathway driven tumors, which may be due to overlapping toxicities precluding sufficient dose exposure.

A phase Ib dose-escalation study of the MEK inhibitor trametinib in combination with the PI3K/mTOR inhibitor GSK2126458 in patients with advanced solid tumors

R. Greenwood

Papers

A phase Ib dose-escalation study of the MEK inhibitor trametinib in combination with the PI3K/mTOR inhibitor GSK2126458 in patients with advanced solid tumors