98%
921
2 minutes
20
Unlabelled: A high therapeutic index (TI), balancing potent oncogenic signaling inhibition in tumor cells with minimal effects on normal cells, is critical for effective cancer therapies. Recent advances have introduced diverse RAS-targeting inhibitors, including mutant-specific inhibitors (e.g., KRAS(G12C) and KRAS(G12D)), as well as paralog- and state-selective inhibitors. Non-mutant-specific RAS inhibition can be accomplished by 1) panRAS-GEF(OFF) inhibitors which inactivate RAS indirectly by inhibiting SHP2 or SOS1, thereby blocking the nucleotide exchange step of RAS activation, 2) direct KRAS(OFF)-selective inhibitors sparing NRAS and HRAS, and 3) panRAS(ON) inhibitors that directly target active RAS, by occluding binding of its effector RAF. However, the signaling inhibition index (SII) - the differential inhibition of oncogenic signaling between RAS-mutant (RAS(MUT)) and normal cells - remains poorly defined for these approaches. In this study, we evaluated the SII of state- and paralog-selective RAS inhibitors across diverse RAS-mutant (RAS(MUT)) and RAS-wild-type (RAS(WT)) models. PanRAS-GEF(OFF) inhibitors exhibited neutral or negative SII, with comparable or reduced MAPK suppression in KRAS(G12X) cells relative to RAS(WT) cells. KRAS(G13D) models showed low sensitivity (negative SII) to panRAS-GEF(OFF) inhibitors, particularly in the context of NF1 loss. Combination treatments with SHP2 and MEK inhibitors resulted in low SII, as pathway suppression was similar in RAS(MUT) and RAS(WT) cells. Furthermore, RAS(Q61X) models were resistant to combined SHP2 inhibitor+MEK inhibitor due to dual mechanisms: MEK inhibitor-induced NRAS(Q61X) reactivation and RAS(MUT)-induced SHP2 conformations impairing inhibitor binding. Overall, panRAS-GEF(OFF) inhibitors exhibited the lowest SII. PanKRAS(OFF) inhibitors demonstrated a higher SII, while panRAS(ON) inhibitors displayed broader activity but relatively narrow SII. We observed that tumors that were sensitive to RAS(MUT)-specific inhibitors, were also sensitive to the state-selective RAS inhibitors (OFF, or ON). In fact, all RAS inhibitors (mutant-specific and state- or paralog-selective) were active in the same portion of RAS(MUT) models, while the majority of RAS(MUT) cell lines were insensitive to all of them. These findings reveal significant SII variability among RAS-targeted inhibitors, depending on the specific RAS driver mutation and cell context and underscore the importance of incorporating SII considerations into the design and clinical application of RAS-targeted therapies to improve therapeutic outcomes.
Main Points: The Signaling Inhibition Index (SII) - i.e. the differential inhibition of oncogenic signaling between tumor and normal cells - was neutral or negative for panRAS-GEF(OFF) inhibitors, with comparable or reduced MAPK suppression in KRAS(G12X) mutant versus RAS(WT) cells. KRAS(G13D) models showed reduced sensitivity, particularly with NF1 loss. SHP2+MEK inhibitor combinations also had low SII, with RAS(Q61X) models demonstrating resistance due to NRAS(Q61X) reactivation and impaired SHP2 inhibitor binding. panKRAS(OFF)-selective inhibitors have a higher SII compared to panRAS-GEF(OFF) inhibitors, offering better tumor-versus-normal cell selectivity. While panRAS(ON) inhibitors displayed a broader activity profile, their ability to selectively inhibit mutant RAS signaling over normal cells remained relatively narrow (low SII). State- and paralog-selective inhibitors have enhanced activity in the same RAS-MUT cancer models that are also sensitive to RAS-MUT-specific inhibitors, suggesting that most KRAS-MUT tumors will not respond uniformly to any one RAS-targeting inhibitor. The effectiveness of paralog- and state-selective inhibitors depends on specific RAS mutations and cell context, highlighting the need to integrate SII considerations into the development and clinical application of RAS-targeted therapies.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11956912 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1101/2025.02.14.638317 | DOI Listing |
Cutan Ocul Toxicol
September 2025
Department of Pharmacy Practice, National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research (NIPER) Guwahati, Kamrup, Assam, India.
Objective: This study aimed to assess the potential risk of Bullous pemphigoid (BP) associated with antidiabetic agents, antimicrobials, diuretics, immune checkpoint inhibitors, and biological agents.
Research Design And Methods: A retrospective pharmacovigilance data analysis was conducted using the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) between Q1/2004 and Q3/2024. Disproportionality analyses, viz.
Health Sci Rep
September 2025
Department of Dermatology the Union Hospital, Fujian Medical University Fuzhou People's Republic of China.
Background And Aims: Several observational studies have reported inconsistent associations between dyslipidaemia, stains use and atopic dermatitis (AD). Nevertheless, the available data on the effects of -C-lowering as well as TG-lowering drugs remain inconclusive and limited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the causal association of lipid traits and long-term use of lipid-lowering drugs on AD risk.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEur J Case Rep Intern Med
August 2025
Dermatology Department, Ain Shams University Hospital, Cairo, Egypt.
Background: Dissecting cellulitis of the scalp (DCS) is a rare, chronic neutrophilic dermatosis that is often refractory to conventional therapies.
Case Report: We present a 29-year-old male with treatment-resistant DCS who achieved rapid and sustained remission following off-label use of tofacitinib, a Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor. Previous therapies, including antibiotics, corticosteroids, and isotretinoin, had failed.
Front Immunol
September 2025
Department of Pathological Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, United States.
Oncolytic virotherapy (OVT) has emerged as a promising and innovative cancer treatment strategy that harnesses engineered viruses to selectively infect, replicate within, and destroys malignant cells while sparing healthy tissues. Beyond direct oncolysis, oncolytic viruses (OVs) exploit tumor-specific metabolic, antiviral, and immunological vulnerabilities to reshape the tumor microenvironment (TME) and initiate systemic antitumor immunity. Despite promising results from preclinical and clinical studies, several barriers, including inefficient intratumoral virus delivery, immune clearance, and tumor heterogeneity, continue to limit the therapeutic advantages of OVT as a standalone modality and hindered its clinical success.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFFront Immunol
September 2025
Department of Thoracic Surgery, Shenzhen People's Hospital (The First Affiliated Hospital, Southern University of Science and Technology; The Second Clinical Medical College, Jinan University), Shenzhen, Guangdong, China.
Background: Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer-related mortality globally, primarily due to late-stage diagnosis, molecular heterogeneity, and therapy resistance. Key biomarkers such as EGFR, ALK, KRAS, and PD-1 have revolutionized precision oncology; however, comprehensive structural and clinical validation of these targets is crucial to enhance therapeutic efficacy.
Methods: Protein sequences for EGFR, ALK, KRAS, and PD-1 were retrieved from UniProt and modeled using SWISS-MODEL to generate high-confidence 3D structures.