Cyclin‐dependent Kinase 12‐mediated Super‐enhancers As Promising Targets in Cancer Therapy
Fuda Xie,Bonan Chen,Xiaoli Liu,Jun Yu,Ka Fai To,Wei Kang
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ctd2.146
2022-01-01
Clinical and Translational Discovery
Abstract:Treating tumour metastasis is one of the biggest challenges in tumour therapy. While metastasis is the most lethal sequela of cancer-causing death of around 90% of patients, there is no trenchant target for this complicated disease cascade. The prognosis of colorectal cancer (CRC), the third frequented malignancy, is dominated by its hepatic metastasis, as approximately 50–75% of advanced-stage CRC patients will suffer from it eventually.1 The leading cause of the high incidence of CRC liver metastasis (CRCLM) is the rich portal venous and arterial blood supply, which provides convenient pipelines for the relocation of circulating tumour cells (CTCs).2 Generated by primary cancer, CTCs are indispensable function implementors connecting primary regions and metastatic lesions among malignancies and are commonly equipped with enhanced cellular characteristics for metastasis, such as stemness and apoptosis resistance.3 Super-enhancers (SEs) are a set of collections of transcriptional enhancers which drive the expression of cell signature genes.4 SEs are considered critical in the transcription of cancer stemness- and metastasis-associated genes.5 Another significant pathological phenomenon involving SEs in CRCLM is the epigenetic alternations between primary tumours and metastatic lesions. Rather than colorectum-related ones, liver-specific transcriptions were observed in hepatic metastatic cells of CRC. Gained epigenetic enhancers were found responsible for the tissue-specific epigenetic reprogramming, which leads to transcriptional alterations in CRCLM.6 In this issue of Clinical and Translational Medicine, Dai et al. demonstrated the relevance between CRC and hepatic metastasis in a SE-landscape orientation.7 Cyclin-dependent kinase 12 (CDK12) was presented as a driving factor for CRCLM, and overexpression of this specific SE component was observed in the pathological process. Besides, several SE-associated oncogenes were determined as critical regulators for forming metastatic-related cellular characters in CRC cells. Unlike the mainstream therapies, this work foregrounded the potential of developing targeting drugs as replenishment for treating CRCLM. Transcriptional dysregulation is one of the core principles of tumour biology and is supported by the expression changes in protein-coding genes and non-coding regulatory factors. In addition to typical enhancers, a cluster of cell type-specific proximal and distal regulatory elements, SEs can drive higher levels of transcriptional activation due to a tenfold multiplication of average density.8 Alternations in the SE landscape are common among malignancies. Dai's research delineated the underlying driving force of SEs in CRCLM, as hundreds of SE-associated genes, including some well-documented oncogenes, were identified. The metastasis-promoting mechanism of SEs is a controversial and intriguing topic for further expansion, while several paradigms have been clearly elucidated in primary cancers.9, 10 Amplification is a universally acknowledged carcinogenic occurrence. Known as “enhancer hijacking”, SEs tend to activate oncogenes when placed in a new genomic environment, which can be triggered by genomic rearrangement (such as inversion or translocation) or deletion. The creation of de novo binding sites for master transcription factors resulting from acquired somatic mutations within SE elements spawns transcriptional upregulation of neighbouring oncogenes. In addition to insertional mutations, single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) is another bridging factor of SE activity and expression of oncogenes. Sometimes SNPs occurring can also result in interferences of tumour suppressor genes. Driver oncogenic mutations can activate and sustain tumour-promoting transcriptions by participating in pre-configured SE regenerative programs. The addiction-like appearance of tumour cells to SE-associated transcriptional dysregulation referrals SEs as novel targets for therapeutic interventions.11 In Dai's work, a set of essential SEs for gene transcription associated with RNA polymerase II (RNA pol II) were evaluated. CDK12 distinguished itself for the significant expression alternation when comparing primary CRC samples with the CRCLM patients. Transcriptional activation, proliferation and outgrowth, cancerous traits, and eventually CRCLM cells were all found to be regulated by CDK12 as well as its functional downstream implementers. These findings protruded the feasibility and superiority of CDK12 as a potent therapeutic target, especially in treating CRCLM.7 CDK12 belongs to the cyclin-dependent kinase family, the subject of vigorous anti-tumour drug discovery research in academia and the pharmaceutical industry. In addition to the direct regulation of oncogenic factors by CDK12-RNAPII (Table 1), the genomic instability induced by CDK12 inactivation contributes to alternatives for cancer therapy. The sensitivity of CDK12 deletion towards DNA damage response suggests synergism between CDK12 inhibitors and poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. This synergism has been proved in ovarian and triple-negative breast cancer cells: combinational administration of Dinaciclib (a pan-CDK inhibitor) and Olaparib (a PARP inhibitor) successfully retarded tumour growth in PDX models.12 In Dai's research, CDK12 inhibition by small molecule SR-4835 or its knockdown were both proved to cause dramatic decreases of S2 phosphorylation on the carboxy-terminal domain of RNA pol II, thus quenching CRCLM.7 Albeit promising as an experimental therapeutic agent, CDK12 inhibitors are facing impediments in clinical utilization. As a phosphorylation kinase, the adenosine triphosphate (ATP)-binding site of CDK12 is a rational targeting region as structural changes in this area implement the inactivation of the substrate. Unfortunately, given the similarity of the ATP-binding sites among the CDK protein family, inhibitors designed for CDK12, like THZ531, might also interact with other CDK proteins. Other family members aside, CDK13 is closely related to and highly homologous with CDK12 structurally, but CDK13 depletion affects different genes and different growth signal pathways.28 Substantial amounts of selective inhibitors designed for CDK12 can bind the same area on CDK13, and the unexpected effects are not to be neglected.29 To make matters worse, acquired drug resistance is commonly observed in CDK12-targeting therapies due to the mutation of Cys1039 induced by long-term medication. A promising counterattack on these dilemmas is a selective CDK12 degrader, namely BSJ-4-116.29 Although drug resistance will eventually develop from two specific mutations on the G ring I733V and G739S from CDK12, this degrader-designing strategy is an inspiration on CDK12 selective inhibitor discovery. In addition to focusing on SEs, the downstream tumour-promoting implementers are also potential targets for cancer therapies, as part of the carcinogenic effect of SEs is based on enhancing the expression of these oncogenes. Dai's work highlighted BCL-XL and CCDC137 as the crucial downstream oncogenes of CDK12 and critical regulators in CRCLM.7 The detailed mechanistic study of their effectiveness can brighten current findings and contribute significantly to the understanding and therapeutic strategies for cancers. Copious inhibitors targeting SEs are being developed, while the side effects and chemoresistance need careful appraisal and deep investigation, given the complexity of the SE regulation and heterogeneity of the tumour microenvironment. Meanwhile, the pre-clinical studies might try the combinational administration of SE inhibitors with chemotherapy or immune checkpoint inhibitors to investigate the effects. We also acknowledge the technical support from Core Utilities of Cancer Genomics and Pathobiology of the Department of Anatomical and Cellular Pathology, The Chinese University of Hong Kong. The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.