2020
DOI: 10.1101/2020.04.28.066241
|View full text |Cite
Preprint
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Marked Synergy by Vertical Inhibition of EGFR signaling in NSCLC Spheroids: SOS1 as a therapeutic target in EGFR-mutated cancer

Abstract: Drug treatment of 3D cancer spheroids more accurately reflects in vivo therapeutic responses compared to adherent culture studies. In EGFR-mutated lung adenocarcinoma, EGFR-TKIs show enhanced efficacy in spheroid cultures. Simultaneous inhibition of multiple parallel RTKs further enhances EGFR-TKI effectiveness. We show that the common RTK signaling intermediate SOS1 was required for 3D spheroid growth of EGFR-mutated NSCLC cells. Using two distinct measures of pharmacologic synergy, we demonstrated that SOS1 … Show more

Help me understand this report
View published versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

1
0
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 61 publications
1
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Our study highlights SOS1 inhibitors as promising combination partners for inhibitors directly targeting KRAS, the GDP-bound form of KRAS, or downstream MAPK pathway intermediates. This finding is also in line with a recent report describing a marked synergy in NSCLC cell lines combining SOS1 inhibition with vertical EGFR inhibition (43). BI-3406 is a selective inhibitor of SOS1 and does not target the paralog GEF SOS2.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%
“…Our study highlights SOS1 inhibitors as promising combination partners for inhibitors directly targeting KRAS, the GDP-bound form of KRAS, or downstream MAPK pathway intermediates. This finding is also in line with a recent report describing a marked synergy in NSCLC cell lines combining SOS1 inhibition with vertical EGFR inhibition (43). BI-3406 is a selective inhibitor of SOS1 and does not target the paralog GEF SOS2.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 91%