Cairns, Junmei

Abstract BACKGROUND: A GWAS for the MA.27 aromatase inhibitors (AIs) adjuvant trial (4,406 controls and 252 cases) identified variant (V) SNPs in a long noncoding (lnc) RNA, MIR2052HG, that were associated with longer breast cancer free interval (HR= 0.37, P= 2.15E-07). V SNPs (MAF= 0.32 to 0.42) were associated with lower MIR2052HG and ERα expression in the presence of AIs. MIR2052HG maintained ERα both by promoting AKT/FOXO3-mediated ESR1 transcription and by limiting ubiquitin-mediated ERα degradation. (Cancer Res 76:7012-23, 2016). Our goal was to further elucidate MIR2052HG's mechanism of action. METHODS: RNA-Binding Protein Immunoprecipitation (RBPI) assays were performed to demonstrate that the transcription factor, early growth response protein 1 (EGR1), worked together with MIR2052HG to regulate lemur tyrosine kinase-3 (LMTK3) transcription in MCF7/AC1 and CAMA-1 cells. The location of EGR1 on the LMTK3 gene locus was mapped using chromatin immunoprecipitation (ChIP) assays. The co-localization of MIR2052HG RNA and the LMTK3 gene locus was determined using RNA-DNA dual fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH). SNP effects were evaluated using a panel of human lymphoblastoid cell lines. RESULTS: TCGA analysis revealed LMTK3 and MIR2052HG expression were highly correlated in ERα-positive breast cancer patients. We found that the MIR2052HG transcript was located in the LMTK3 gene locus by RNA-DNA FISH. Among all of the 12 potential LMTK3 transcription factors identified in the Encode database that were examined by RBPI, only EGR1 showed an interaction with MIR2052HG. CHIP assays confirmed EGR1 binding to the two putative EGR1 binding sites in LMTK3 gene.Depletion of MIR2052HG reduced the binding of EGR1 to the LMTK3 promoter and decreased LMTK3 expression, suggesting that it might function as a scaffold. Mechanistically, decreased LMTK3 levels further increased protein kinase C (PKC) activity and downstream AKT activity, leading to reduced ESR1 mRNA levels via increased pFOXO3. At the protein level, in MIR2052HG depleted cells, increased PKC activity increased the phosphorylation of MEK, ERK, and RSK1, leading to increased ERα phosphorylation at Ser167 and increased ERα degradation. Conversely, overexpression of LMTK3 in MIR2052HG depleted cells reversed these phenotypes. MIR2052HG regulated LMTK3 and ERα expression in a SNP- dependent fashion: the MIR2052HG V SNP, relative to wild-type (WT) genotype, increased LMTK3/ERα expression in response to androstenedione due to increased binding between EGR1 and the LMTK3 promoter in LCLs. However, AI treatment reduced this binding in MIR2052HG variant cells but increased binding in WT cells, resulting in decreased LMTK3/ERα in V cells and increased expression in WT cells. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support a model in which the protective MIR2052HG variant genotype regulates LMTK3 via MIR2052HG/EGR1, and LMTK3 regulates ERα stability via the PKC/MEK/ERK/RSK1 axis. This regulation may explain the effect of the MIR2052HG variant genotype on cell proliferation and response to AIs in MA.27. These findings provide new insight into the mechanism of action of MIR2052HG and suggest that LMTK3 may be a new therapeutic target in ERα-positive breast cancer patients treated with AIs. Citation Format: Cairns J, Ingle JN, Shepherd LE, Kubo M, Goetz MP, Weinshilboum RM, Kalari KR, Wang L. LncRNA MIR2052HG regulates ERα level and endocrine resistance through LMTK3 by recruiting early growth response protein 1 [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-07-01.

Abstract BACKGROUND: Based on prospective clinical trials, there is no evidence for differences in efficacy between the 3 aromatase inhibitors (AIs) anastrozole, exemestane, and letrozole. The purpose of this study was to identify germline genetic variants associated with response to AIs and to help identify novel mechanisms associated with drug disease efficacy. METHODS: A genome-wide association study (GWAS) was performed for 624 patients (Steroids 2015;99:32-38) to identify SNPs associated with estrogen level change in women with estrogen receptor (ER) positive breast cancer treated with anastrozole. Replication of associated SNPs was performed in a GWAS from the MA.27 trial that compared adjuvant anastrozole and exemestane treatment of post-menopausal women with ER+ breast cancer. Functional studies were subsequently performed to determine SNP effects and underlying mechanisms. RESULTS: Our initial GWAS identified SNPs within CSMD1 that were associated with changes in estrogen levels during anastrozole therapy. An additional SNP in CSMD1 was also associated with breast cancer events in CCTG MA.27. Functionally, we showed that CSMD1 regulates CYP19 expression in a SNP-, and in an anastrozole- dependent fashion. These phenomena were not observed for either letrozole or exemestane. In MA.27, an anastrozole- specific effect was also seen with the minor allele having a protective effect on time to distant metastasis (HR=0.49, p=0.00259), but this was not the case for exemestane (HR=0.71, p=0.111). Our in vitro functional studies indicated that overexpression of CSMD1 sensitized anastrozole or letrozole resistant cells to anastrozole but not to the other two AIs. The SNP in CSMD1 that was associated with increased CSMD1 and CYP19 expression levels increased anastrozole sensitivity, but not letrozole or exemestane in lymphoblastoid cell lines (LCLs) homozygous for either WT or variant CSMD1 SNP genotypes. Based on these observations, we explored whether anastrozole has additional mechanisms beyond its function as a CYP19 inhibitor. Utilizing an estrogen response element (ERE) luciferase reporter assay in a CYP19 CRISPR knockout breast cancer T47D cell line and a surface plasmon resonance (SPR) assay, we found that anastrozole can also function as an ERα agonist, and can bind to, and result in, proteasome dependent ERα degradation, especially in the presence of E2. Treatment of these CYP19 CRISPR knockout cells with anastrozole in the presence of increasing concentrations of E2 results in greater sensitivity compared with anastrozole alone, while the addition of E2, as expected, does not improve letrozole or exemestane sensitivity. These same observations were also seen in letrozole and anastrazole resistant cells. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that anastrozole might be more effective than letrozole or exemestane in patients with the CSMD1 SNP. Furthermore, anastrozole can function as an ERα agonist, binding to ERα and resulting in its degradation, especially in the presence of E2. These findings should help to make it possible to develop precision endocrine therapies for women who are candidates for AIs. Citation Format: Cairns J, Ingle J, Dudenkov T, Kalari K, Buzdar A, Kubo M, Robson M, Ellis M, Goss P, Shepherd L, Goetz M, Weinshilboum R, Wang L. CSMD1 SNPs selectively affect anastrozole response in postmenopausal breast cancer patients [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD1-04.