Inference of transcriptional networks that regulate transitions into physiologic or pathologic cellular states remains a central challenge in systems biology. A mesenchymal phenotype is the hallmark of tumor aggressiveness in human malignant glioma but the regulatory programs responsible for implementing the associated molecular signature are largely unknown. Here, we show that reverse-engineering and unbiased interrogation of a glioma-specific regulatory network reveal the transcriptional module that activates expression of mesenchymal genes in malignant glioma. Two transcription factors (C/EBPβ and Stat3) emerge as synergistic initiators and master regulators of mesenchymal transformation. Ectopic co-expression of C/EBPβ and Stat3 reprograms neural stem cells along the aberrant mesenchymal lineage whereas elimination of the two factors in glioma cells leads to collapse of the mesenchymal signature and reduces tumor aggressiveness. In human glioma, expression of C/EBPβ and Stat3 correlates with mesenchymal differentiation and predicts poor clinical outcome. These results reveal that activation of a small regulatory module is necessary and sufficient to initiate and maintain an aberrant phenotypic state in cancer cells.

Purpose: Over the past few years, the alkylating agent temozolomide has become the standardof-care therapy for patients with glioblastoma, the most common brain tumor. Recently, largescale cancer genome sequencing efforts have identified a hypermutation phenotype and inactivating MSH6 mismatch repair gene mutations in recurrent, post-temozolomide glioblastomas, particularly those growing more rapidly during temozolomide treatment. This study aimed to clarify the timing and role of MSH6 mutations in mediating glioblastoma temozolomide resistance. Experimental Design: MSH6 sequence and microsatellite instability (MSI) status were determined in matched prechemotherapy and postchemotherapy glioblastomas identified by The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) as having posttreatment MSH6 mutations. Temozolomide-resistant lines were derived in vitro through selective growth under temozolomide, and the MSH6 gene was sequenced in resistant clones. The role of MSH6 inactivation in mediating resistance was explored using lentiviral short hairpin RNA knockdown and MSH6 reconstitution. Results: MSH6 mutations were confirmed in posttreatment TCGA glioblastomas but absent in matched pretreatment tumors. The posttreatment hypermutation phenotype displayed a signature bias toward CpC transitions and was not associated with MSI. In vitro modeling through exposure of an MSH6 wild-type glioblastoma line to temozolomide resulted in resistant clones; one clone showed an MSH6 mutation,Thr 1219 Ile, that had been independently noted in two treatedTCGA glioblastomas. Knockdown of MSH6 in the glioblastoma line U251increased resistance to temozolomide cytotoxicity and reconstitution restored cytotoxicity in MSH6-null glioma cells. Conclusions: MSH6 mutations are selected in glioblastomas during temozolomide therapy both in vitro and in vivo and are causally associated with temozolomide resistance.

CCI-779 was well tolerated at this dose schedule; however, there was no evidence of efficacy in patients with recurrent GBM. Despite initial disease stabilization in approximately 50% of patients, the durability of response was short. Because of the low toxicity profile, CCI-779 may merit exploration in combination with other modalities.

Patients with (a) recurrent malignant glioma (MG): glioblastoma (GBM) or recurrent anaplastic glioma (AG), and (b) nonprogressive (NP) GBM following radiation therapy (RT) were eligible. Primary objective for recurrent MG was progression-free survival at 6 months (PFS-6) and overall survival at 12 months for NP GBM post-RT. Secondary objectives for recurrent MGs were response, survival, assessment of toxicity, and pharmacokinetics (PKs). Treatment with enzyme-inducing antiepileptic drugs was not allowed. Patients received 150 mg/day erlotinib. Patients requiring surgery were treated 7 days prior to tumor removal for PK analysis and effects of erlotinib on epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and intracellular signaling pathways. Ninety-six patients were evaluable (53 recurrent MG and 43 NP GBM); 5 patients were not evaluable for response. PFS-6 in recurrent GBM was 3% with a median PFS of 2 months; PFS-6 in recurrent AG was 27% with a median PFS of 2 months. Twelve-month survival was 57% in NP GBMs post-RT. Primary toxicity was dermatologic. The tissue-to-plasma ratio normalized to nanograms per gram dry weight for erlotinib and OSI-420 ranged from 25% to 44% and 30% to 59%, respectively, for pretreated surgical patients. No effect on EGFR or intratumoral signaling was seen. Patients with NP GBM post-RT who developed rash in cycle 1 had improved survival (P < .001). Single-agent activity of erlotinib is minimal for recurrent MGs and marginally beneficial following RT for NP GBM patients. Development of rash in cycle 1 correlates with survival in patients with NP GBM after RT.