↓ Skip to main content

Targeting tumour re-wiring by triple blockade of mTORC1, epidermal growth factor, and oestrogen receptor signalling pathways in endocrine-resistant breast cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Breast Cancer Research, June 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (80th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Targeting tumour re-wiring by triple blockade of mTORC1, epidermal growth factor, and oestrogen receptor signalling pathways in endocrine-resistant breast cancer
Published in
Breast Cancer Research, June 2018
DOI 10.1186/s13058-018-0983-1
Pubmed ID
Authors

Ricardo Ribas, Sunil Pancholi, Aradhana Rani, Eugene Schuster, Stephanie K. Guest, Joanna Nikitorowicz-Buniak, Nikiana Simigdala, Allan Thornhill, Francesca Avogadri-Connors, Richard E. Cutler, Alshad S. Lalani, Mitch Dowsett, Stephen R. Johnston, Lesley-Ann Martin

Abstract

Endocrine therapies are the mainstay of treatment for oestrogen receptor (ER)-positive (ER+) breast cancer (BC). However, resistance remains problematic largely due to enhanced cross-talk between ER and growth factor pathways, circumventing the need for steroid hormones. Previously, we reported the anti-proliferative effect of everolimus (RAD001-mTORC1 inhibitor) with endocrine therapy in resistance models; however, potential routes of escape from treatment via ERBB2/3 signalling were observed. We hypothesised that combined targeting of three cellular nodes (ER, ERBB, and mTORC1) may provide enhanced long-term clinical utility. A panel of ER+ BC cell lines adapted to long-term oestrogen deprivation (LTED) and expressing ESR1 wt or ESR1 Y537S , modelling acquired resistance to an aromatase-inhibitor (AI), were treated in vitro with a combination of RAD001 and neratinib (pan-ERBB inhibitor) in the presence or absence of oestradiol (E2), tamoxifen (4-OHT), or fulvestrant (ICI182780). End points included proliferation, cell signalling, cell cycle, and effect on ER-mediated transactivation. An in-vivo model of AI resistance was treated with monotherapies and combinations to assess the efficacy in delaying tumour progression. RNA-seq analysis was performed to identify changes in global gene expression as a result of the indicated therapies. Here, we show RAD001 and neratinib (pan-ERBB inhibitor) caused a concentration-dependent decrease in proliferation, irrespective of the ESR1 mutation status. The combination of either agent with endocrine therapy further reduced proliferation but the maximum effect was observed with a triple combination of RAD001, neratinib, and endocrine therapy. In the absence of oestrogen, RAD001 caused a reduction in ER-mediated transcription in the majority of the cell lines, which associated with a decrease in recruitment of ER to an oestrogen-response element on the TFF1 promoter. Contrastingly, neratinib increased both ER-mediated transactivation and ER recruitment, an effect reduced by the addition of RAD001. In-vivo analysis of an LTED model showed the triple combination of RAD001, neratinib, and fulvestrant was most effective at reducing tumour volume. Gene set enrichment analysis revealed that the addition of neratinib negated the epidermal growth factor (EGF)/EGF receptor feedback loops associated with RAD001. Our data support the combination of therapies targeting ERBB2/3 and mTORC1 signalling, together with fulvestrant, in patients who relapse on endocrine therapy and retain a functional ER.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 16%
Other 2 6%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 6%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Researcher 2 6%
Other 5 16%
Unknown 14 44%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 8 25%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 9%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 6%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 12 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 December 2020.
All research outputs
#3,344,670
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research
#366
of 2,054 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#64,836
of 342,171 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research
#7
of 35 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 86th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,054 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 342,171 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 35 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.