Subscribe to RSS
High-Throughput Screening of Epigenetic Inhibitors in Meningiomas Identifies HDAC, G9a, and Jumonji-Domain Inhibition as Potential TherapiesFunding Funding for this work was acquired through Meningioma Mommas and the Department of Neurosurgery at the University of Colorado, Anschutz Medical Campus. Tissue was acquired by the neurosurgeons and Department of Neurosurgery Team through the Neurosurgery Neural Tissue Bank at the University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus. Cell lines were donated by the University of Utah. The authors would like to thank the patients who selflessly consented to donate their tissue for this work.
Background Epigenetics may predict treatment sensitivity and clinical course for patients with meningiomas more accurately than histopathology. Nonetheless, targeting epigenetic mechanisms is understudied for pharmacotherapeutic development for these tumors. The bio-molecular insights and potential therapeutic development of meningioma epigenetics led us to investigate epigenetic inhibition in meningiomas.
Methods We screened a 43-tumor cohort using a 139-compound epigenetic inhibitor library to assess sensitivity of relevant meningioma subgroups to epigenetic inhibition. The cohort was composed of 5 cell lines and 38 tumors cultured directly from surgery; mean patient age was 56.6 years ± 13.9 standard deviation. Tumor categories: 38 primary tumors, 5 recurrent; 33 from females, 10 from males; 32 = grade 1; 10 = grade 2; 1 = grade 3.
Results Consistent with our previous results, histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDACi) were the most efficacious class. Panobinostat significantly reduced cell viability in 36 of 43 tumors; 41 tumors had significant sensitivity to some HDACi. G9a inhibition and Jumonji-domain inhibition also significantly reduced cell viability across the cohort; tumors that lost sensitivity to panobinostat maintained sensitivity to either G9a or Jumonji-domain inhibition. Sensitivity to G9a and HDAC inhibition increased with tumor grade; tumor responses did not separate by gender. Few differences were found between recurrent and primary tumors, or between those with prior radiation versus those without.
Conclusions Few efforts have investigated the efficacy of targeting epigenetic mechanisms to treat meningiomas, making the clinical utility of epigenetic inhibition largely unknown. Our results suggest that epigenetic inhibition is a targetable area for meningioma pharmacotherapy.
* Co-first Authors.
Institutional Review Board Approval
The study was conducted according to the guidelines of the Declaration of Helsinki, and approved by the Institutional Review Board (or Ethics Committee) of the University of Colorado Anschutz (COMIRB Protocol #13–3007; approval date: November 14, 2019).
Philip D. Tatman: conceptualization, methodology, validation, formal analysis, investigation, data curation, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing, visualization. Tadeusz H. Wroblewski: conceptualization, methodology, validation, formal analysis, investigation, data curation, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing, visualization. Anthony R. Fringuello: methodology, data curation, investigation, writing—review and editing. Samuel R. Scherer: methodology, data curation, investigation, writing—review and editing. William B. Foreman: methodology, data curation, investigation, writing—review and editing. Denise M. Damek: conceptualization, formal analysis, resources, writing—review and editing. Kevin O. Lillehei: conceptualization, resources, writing—review and editing, funding acquisition. Randy L. Jensen: conceptualization, resources, writing—review and editing. A. Samy Youssef: conceptualization, resources, writing—review and editing. D. Ryan Ormond: conceptualization, resources, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing, supervision. Michael W. Graner: conceptualization, resources, writing—original draft, writing—review and editing, supervision, project administration, funding acquisition.
All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Received: 16 February 2022
Accepted: 20 June 2022
Accepted Manuscript online:
25 June 2022
Article published online:
25 August 2022
© 2022. Thieme. All rights reserved.
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
- 1 Ostrom QT, Gittleman H, Xu J. et al. CBTRUS Statistical Report: primary brain and other central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2009-2013. Neuro-oncol 2016; 18 (suppl_5): v1-v75
- 2 Ostrom QT, Gittleman H, Liao P. et al. CBTRUS Statistical Report: primary brain and other central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2010-2014. Neuro-oncol 2017; 19 (suppl_5): v1-v88
- 3 Ostrom QT, Gittleman H, Truitt G, Boscia A, Kruchko C, Barnholtz-Sloan JS. CBTRUS Statistical Report: primary brain and other central nervous system tumors diagnosed in the United States in 2011-2015. Neuro-oncol 2018; 20 (suppl_4): iv1-iv86
- 4 van Alkemade H, de Leau M, Dieleman EM. et al. Impaired survival and long-term neurological problems in benign meningioma. Neuro-oncol 2012; 14 (05) 658-666
- 5 Choy W, Kim W, Nagasawa D. et al. The molecular genetics and tumor pathogenesis of meningiomas and the future directions of meningioma treatments. Neurosurg Focus 2011; 30 (05) E6
- 6 Rogers L, Barani I, Chamberlain M. et al. Meningiomas: knowledge base, treatment outcomes, and uncertainties. A RANO review. J Neurosurg 2015; 122 (01) 4-23
- 7 Aghi MK, Carter BS, Cosgrove GR. et al. Long-term recurrence rates of atypical meningiomas after gross total resection with or without postoperative adjuvant radiation. Neurosurgery 2009; 64 (01) 56-60 , discussion 60
- 8 Jääskeläinen J. Seemingly complete removal of histologically benign intracranial meningioma: late recurrence rate and factors predicting recurrence in 657 patients. A multivariate analysis. Surg Neurol 1986; 26 (05) 461-469
- 9 Nigim F, Wakimoto H, Kasper EM, Ackermans L, Temel Y. Emerging medical treatments for meningioma in the molecular era. Biomedicines 2018; 6 (03) E86
- 10 Petrilli AM, Fernández-Valle C. Role of Merlin/NF2 inactivation in tumor biology. Oncogene 2016; 35 (05) 537-548
- 11 Al-Mefty O, Kadri PA, Pravdenkova S, Sawyer JR, Stangeby C, Husain M. Malignant progression in meningioma: documentation of a series and analysis of cytogenetic findings. J Neurosurg 2004; 101 (02) 210-218
- 12 Barski D, Wolter M, Reifenberger G, Riemenschneider MJ. Hypermethylation and transcriptional downregulation of the TIMP3 gene is associated with allelic loss on 22q12.3 and malignancy in meningiomas. Brain Pathol 2010; 20 (03) 623-631
- 13 Bello MJ, Amiñoso C, Lopez-Marin I. et al. DNA methylation of multiple promoter-associated CpG islands in meningiomas: relationship with the allelic status at 1p and 22q. Acta Neuropathol 2004; 108 (05) 413-421
- 14 He S, Pham MH, Pease M. et al. A review of epigenetic and gene expression alterations associated with intracranial meningiomas. Neurosurg Focus 2013; 35 (06) E5
- 15 Bush ML, Oblinger J, Brendel V. et al. AR42, a novel histone deacetylase inhibitor, as a potential therapy for vestibular schwannomas and meningiomas. Neuro-oncol 2011; 13 (09) 983-999
- 16 Chen CS, Weng SC, Tseng PH, Lin HP, Chen CS. Histone acetylation-independent effect of histone deacetylase inhibitors on Akt through the reshuffling of protein phosphatase 1 complexes. J Biol Chem 2005; 280 (46) 38879-38887
- 17 Rong R, Tang X, Gutmann DH, Ye K. Neurofibromatosis 2 (NF2) tumor suppressor merlin inhibits phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase through binding to PIKE-L. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2004; 101 (52) 18200-18205
- 18 Sahm F, Schrimpf D, Stichel D. et al. DNA methylation-based classification and grading system for meningioma: a multicentre, retrospective analysis. Lancet Oncol 2017; 18 (05) 682-694
- 19 Hatada I. The epigenomics of cancer. In: Cho WC, ed. An Omics Perspective on Cancer Research. New York, NY: Springer; 2010: 51-67
- 20 Perdigoto CN. Epigenetic cancer evolution, one cell at a time. Nat Rev Genet 2019; 20 (08) 434-435
- 21 Galani V, Lampri E, Varouktsi A, Alexiou G, Mitselou A, Kyritsis AP. Genetic and epigenetic alterations in meningiomas. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2017; 158: 119-125
- 22 Tatman PD, Wroblewski TH, Fringuello AR. et al. High-throughput mechanistic screening of epigenetic compounds for the potential treatment of meningiomas. J Clin Med 2021; 10 (14) 3150
- 23 DeQuach JA, Yuan SH, Goldstein LS, Christman KL. Decellularized porcine brain matrix for cell culture and tissue engineering scaffolds. Tissue Eng Part A 2011; 17 (21–22): 2583-2592
- 24 Park JA, Kim AJ, Kang Y, Jung YJ, Kim HK, Kim KC. Deacetylation and methylation at histone H3 lysine 9 (H3K9) coordinate chromosome condensation during cell cycle progression. Mol Cells 2011; 31 (04) 343-349
- 25 Brown PA, Kairalla JA, Hilden JM. et al. FLT3 inhibitor lestaurtinib plus chemotherapy for newly diagnosed KMT2A-rearranged infant acute lymphoblastic leukemia: Children's Oncology Group trial AALL0631. Leukemia 2021; 35 (05) 1279-1290
- 26 Mei Y, Bi WL, Greenwald NF. et al. Genomic profile of human meningioma cell lines. PLoS One 2017; 12 (05) e0178322
- 27 Jung M, Kim SI, Lim KY. et al. The substantial loss of H3K27me3 can stratify risk in grade 2, but not in grade 3 meningioma. Hum Pathol 2021; 115: 96-103
- 28 Katz LM, Hielscher T, Liechty B. et al. Loss of histone H3K27me3 identifies a subset of meningiomas with increased risk of recurrence. Acta Neuropathol 2018; 135 (06) 955-963
- 29 Behling F, Fodi C, Gepfner-Tuma I. et al; International Consortium on Meningiomas. H3K27me3 loss indicates an increased risk of recurrence in the Tübingen meningioma cohort. Neuro-oncol 2021; 23 (08) 1273-1281
- 30 Gauchotte G, Peyre M, Pouget C. et al. Prognostic value of histopathological features and loss of H3K27me3 immunolabeling in anaplastic meningioma: a multicenter retrospective study. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol 2020; 79 (07) 754-762