CD33 reponses are blocked by SOCS3 through accelerated proteasomal-mediated turnover

CD33 is a member of the sialic acid–binding immunoglobulin-like lectin (Siglec) family of inhibitory receptors and a therapeutic target for acute myeloid leukemia (AML). CD33 contains a cytoplasmic immunoreceptor tyrosine-based inhibitory motif (ITIM), which can recruit SHP-1 and SHP-2. How CD33 expression is regulated is unclear. Suppressor of cytokine signaling 3 (SOCS3) is expressed in response to cytokines, LPS, and other PAMPs, and competes with SHP-1/2 binding to ITIMs of cytokine receptors, thereby inhibiting signaling. In this study, using peptide pull-down experiments, we found that SOCS3 can specifically bind to the phosphorylated ITIM of CD33. Additionally, following cross-linking SOCS3 can recruit the ECS E3 ligase resulting in accelerated proteasomal degradation of both CD33 and SOCS3. Our data suggest that the tyrosine motifs in CD33 are not important for internalization, while they are required for degradation. Moreover, SOCS3 inhibited the CD33-induced block on cytokine-induced proliferation. This is the first receptor shown to be degraded by SOCS3 and where SOCS3 and its target protein are degraded concomitantly. Our findings clearly suggest that during an inflammatory response, the inhibitory receptor CD33 is lost by this mechanism. Moreover, this has important clinical implications as tumors expressing SOCS3 may be refractory to -CD33 therapy.

Recombinant cathepsin S propeptide attenuates cell invasion by inhibition of cathepsin L-like proteases in tumor microenvironment

Human cathepsin L along with cathepsin S, K, and V are collectively known as cathepsin L-like proteases due to their high homology. The overexpression and aberrant activity of each of these proteases has been implicated in tumorigenesis. These proteases contain propeptide domains that can potently inhibit both their cognate protease and other proteases within the cathepsin L-like subfamily. In this investigation, we have produced the cathepsin S propeptide recombinantly and have shown that it is a potent inhibitor of the peptidolytic, elastinolytic, and gelatinolytic activities of the cathepsin L-like proteases. In addition, we show that this peptide is capable of significantly attenuating tumor cell invasion in a panel of human cancer cell lines. Furthermore, fusion of an IgG Fc-domain to the COOH terminus of the propeptide resulted in a chimeric protein with significantly enhanced ability to block tumor cell invasion. This Fc fusion protein exhibited enhanced stability in cell-based assays in comparison with the unmodified propeptide species. This approach for the combined inhibition of the cathepsin L-like proteases may prove useful for the further study in cancer and other conditions where their aberrant activity has been implicated. Furthermore, this strategy for simultaneous inhibition of multiple cysteine cathepsins may represent the basis for novel therapeutics to attenuate tumorigenesis.

The addition of cetuximab to oxaliplatin-based first-line combination chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer: results of the MRC COIN trial.

Background: In the Medical Research Council (MRC) COIN trial, the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-targeted antibody cetuximab was added to standard chemotherapy in first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer with the aim of assessing effect on overall survival.
Methods: In this randomised controlled trial, patients who were fit for but had not received previous chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer were randomly assigned to oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy (arm A), the same combination plus cetuximab (arm B), or intermittent chemotherapy (arm C). The choice of fluoropyrimidine therapy (capecitabine or infused fluouroracil plus leucovorin) was decided before randomisation. Randomisation was done centrally (via telephone) by the MRC Clinical Trials Unit using minimisation. Treatment allocation was not masked. The comparison of arms A and C is described in a companion paper. Here, we present the comparison of arm A and B, for which the primary outcome was overall survival in patients with KRAS wild-type tumours. Analysis was by intention to treat. Further analyses with respect to NRAS, BRAF, and EGFR status were done. The trial is registered, ISRCTN27286448.
Findings: 1630 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups (815 to standard therapy and 815 to addition of cetuximab). Tumour samples from 1316 (81%) patients were used for somatic molecular analyses; 565 (43%) had KRAS mutations. In patients with KRAS wild-type tumours (arm A, n=367; arm B, n=362), overall survival did not differ between treatment groups (median survival 17·9 months [IQR 10·3—29·2] in the control group vs 17·0 months [9·4—30·1] in the cetuximab group; HR 1·04, 95% CI 0·87—1·23, p=0·67). Similarly, there was no effect on progression-free survival (8·6 months [IQR 5·0—12·5] in the control group vs 8·6 months [5·1—13·8] in the cetuximab group; HR 0·96, 0·82—1·12, p=0·60). Overall response rate increased from 57% (n=209) with chemotherapy alone to 64% (n=232) with addition of cetuximab (p=0·049). Grade 3 and higher skin and gastrointestinal toxic effects were increased with cetuximab (14 vs 114 and 67 vs 97 patients in the control group vs the cetuximab group with KRAS wild-type tumours, respectively). Overall survival differs by somatic mutation status irrespective of treatment received: BRAF mutant, 8·8 months (IQR 4·5—27·4); KRAS mutant, 14·4 months (8·5—24·0); all wild-type, 20·1 months (11·5—31·7).
Interpretation: This trial has not confirmed a benefit of addition of cetuximab to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy in first-line treatment of patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Cetuximab increases response rate, with no evidence of benefit in progression-free or overall survival in KRAS wild-type patients or even in patients selected by additional mutational analysis of their tumours. The use of cetuximab in combination with oxaliplatin and capecitabine in first-line chemotherapy in patients with widespread metastases cannot be recommended.