Wang, L

Abstract Introduction: The vast majority of cancer patients continue to receive treatments that are minimally informed by omics data. In the case of breast cancer, only ER and HER2 are routinely used for treatment selection. There is a particular need for personalized treatment in individuals with primary and secondary drug resistance or aggressive breast cancers. Emerging bioinformatics and statistical methods have made a fundamental impact on cancer research. However, challenges remains with regard to patient-centric data analysis and providing genomic data guidance to oncologists. There exists a large number of FDA approved anti-neoplastic drugs used to treat cancers other than breast and the development of innovative informatics methods and algorithms to repurpose those drugs should benefit breast cancer patients. Methods and Results: We have developed precision care systems (such as PANOPLY and CORPUS) to identify personalized therapies for an individual patient and to deliver genomic reports in a standard, searchable format so that a researcher or an oncologist can quickly navigate through molecular data and obtain prioritized drugs and targets.The PANOPLY (Precision cancer genomics report: single sample inventory) algorithm applies machine learning and topology-based network analysis methods to integrate multi-omics profiles and clinical data; individual-specific molecular alterations are identified and compared with a set of matched-controls having similar clinical data. Since there is a lack of a “gold standard” dataset to test such algorithms, we simulated 500 case-control sets and evaluated drug predictions across multiple simulation scenarios. We applied the PANOPLY algorithm to The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) breast cancer cohort, which consists of multi-omics data and clinical data. In addition, PANOPLY was also applied to an in-house neoadjuvant breast cancer study (BEAUTY) that consists of multi-omics data, clinical data, and patient-derived xenografts (PDXs). In the TCGA breast cancer study we obtained survival data to determine the cases and matched-controls; and in the BEAUTY, we used pathologic complete response (pCR) as an outcome to determine responders and non-responders. Recurrent targetable alterations were not enriched in patients without pCR in the BEAUTY study. We have applied the PANOPLY to non-responder patients to identify individual specific alterations, dysregulated networks, drug targets, and drugs for each patient and stored them as case reports in CORPUS (Computational Oncology Reports and Precision therapeUticS), a web-based repository that allows clinicians to review genomic reports. Using comprehensive “omic” data derived from a triple negative breast cancer patient who had pre and post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy PDXs, PANOPLY prioritized the PARP inhibitors as the top class of drug. Using the PDX models available from this patient, we tested olaparib and confirmed the in vivo antitumor activity (more effective than vehicle with a p-value < 0.05 in the PDXs). Further studies to confirm PANOPLY findings are currently underway. Conclusions: In summary, the PANOPLY and CORPUS systems incorporate molecular data together with clinical data to provide genomic reports with proposed drug targets to advance or enable precision breast cancer care. Citation Format: Kalari KR, Sinnwell JP, Thompson KJ, Tang X, Carlson EE, Alaparthi T, Yu J, Vedell PT, Kalmbach MT, Bockol MA, Hossain A, Weinshilboum RM, Boughey JC, Wang L, Suman VJ, Goetz MP. Multiscale modeling of omics data for precision breast cancer treatment [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2018 Dec 4-8; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-06-10.

Abstract Background: Tumorigenesis involves both genetic and epigenetic changes. Epigenetic alterations are reversible and are promising cancer therapeutic targets. Decitabine (5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine), a DNA methyltransferase inhibitor, is FDA approved for hematological malignancies. However, the effect of decitabine in breast cancer is not completely understood. Previous reports indicated that one decitabine mechanism involves regulation of protein levels for DNMT1, the major DNA methyltransferase that methylates hemimethylated CpG di-nucleotides in DNA. However, the E3 ligase involved in this process has not been identified. Whether decitabine also regulates DNMT3A and 3B in a similar fashion remains unclear. Therefore, our goals were to 1) understand mechanisms underlying decitabine action, 2) test the antitumor activity of decitabine in breast cancer models and 3) identify biomarkers associated with response to decitabine. Methods and Results: Western blots of breast cancer cell lines showed that DNMT1, DNMT3A, and DNMT3B protein levels decreased following decitabine treatment without a reduction in mRNA levels. Bioinformatic analysis of DNA methyltransferase sequences revealed a potential TRAF6 binding motif, and the interaction with TRAF6 (TNF receptor-associated factor 6) was confirmed by IP. TRAF6 functions as an E3 ligase. To determine whether TRAF6 might be the E3 ligase responsible for the degradation of DNMTs after decitabine treatment, we knocked down TRAF6 by RNA interference or knocked out the TRAF6 gene by CRISPR/Cas9. Down regulation of TRAF6 attenuated DNMT ubiquitination and increased DNMT protein levels, suggesting that TRAF6 might mediate proteasome-dependent degradation of all three DNMTs. This was further confirmed by reconstituting the knockout cells with WT and a TRAF6-C70A mutant, followed by assessing DNMT protein levels. Global DNA methylation was also increased after TRAF6 depletion and was confirmed in TRAF6 knock out cells in which DNMT levels were unaffected by decitabine. Cell cytotoxicity and colony forming assays showed that TRAF6 knockout cells were resistant to decitabine, suggesting that a major decitabine mechanism of action is through the regulation of TRAF6 which, in turn, degrades DNMTs, leading to decreased global methylation. Finally, decitabine significantly induced TRAF6 at both mRNA and protein levels, a process that might create positive feedback leading to increased degradation of DNMT proteins upon decitabine treatment. Based on these results, we further hypothesized that levels of the three DNMTs might influence decitabine response. Using 18 breast cancer patient derived xenograft (PDX) models, we found a wide range of DNMT protein levels regardless of ER/HER2 status. DNMT levels in the PDX models were directly associated with sensitivity to decitabine treatment, confirming our hypothesis. Conclusion: Our data showed that decitabine might be an effective agent for treating breast cancer and revealed a novel mechanism underlying decitabine treatment. Baseline DNMT protein levels may serve as a biomarker for predicting decitabine drug response. Citation Format: Yu J, Qin B, Boughey JC, Moyer AM, Visscher DW, Sinnwell JP, Yin P, Thompson KJ, Docter TJ, Kalari KR, Suman VJ, Wieben ED, Felten SJ, Conners AL, Jones KN, McLaughlin SA, Copland JA III, Moreno Aspitia A, Northfelt DW, Gray RJ, Ingle JN, Lou Z, Weinshilboum R, Goetz MP, Wang L. Regulation of DNA methyltransferases via TRAF6 determines breast cancer response to decitabine. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-07-51.