CSIG-09. BEYOND SINGLE AGENTS: EXPLORING THE POTENTIAL OF ABEMACICLIB IN COMBINATION WITH PANOBINOSTAT FOR IMPROVED GLIOMA TREATMENT

• Published in: Neuro-oncology (Charlottesville, Va.) Va.), 2024-11, Vol.26 (Supplement_8), p.viii65-viii65
• Main Authors: Rao, Namratha B, Miller, Tracy A, Premkumar, Daniel R, Pollack, Ian F
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• ISSN: 1522-8517; 1523-5866
• DOI: 10.1093/neuonc/noae165.0258

Abstract BACKGROUND Glioblastoma is the most common primary central nervous system tumour with a median survival of less than 15 months. Addressing the underlying redundant, and converging signaling pathways necessitates the utilization of small molecule inhibitors capable of simultaneous targeting and inhibition. In glioma, the aberrant CDK4/6-Rb pathway dysregulation resulting in disruption of cell cycle checkpoint progression can lead to uncontrolled cell division, a hallmark of cancer. The neuro-pharmacokinetics of abemaciclib, a Cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor, is being currently investigated in phase 1 clinical trials by National Cancer Institue, [NCT05413304]. The importance of panobinostat as a Histone deacetylase inhibitor and potentiating the effects of various small molecular inhibitors in published literature is paramount. This study is based on investigating ways to overcome resistance by exploring the synergistic cytotoxic effects of abemaciclib in combination with panobinostat in glioma. METHODS We investigated the antiproliferative effects of abemaciclib and panobinostat on glioma cells using an MTS cell proliferation assay. Inhibitor combination analysis was done using, SYNERGYFINDER via zip-model. Flow cytometry with Annexin V staining further assessed cell death and apoptosis induced. RESULTS The antiproliferative effects of abemaciclib, alone and in combination with panobinostat, in pediatric lines (KNS 42, SJG2), and adult human glioblastoma line, SF188 exhibited lower IC50 as compared to adult high grade glioma lines (LN 18, LNZ 308). Synergy analysis revealed a strong cytotoxic effect in KNS 42 and SF 188 cells treated with the combination. Flow cytometric analysis indicated that the combination therapy induced significant cell death only in a subset of cell lines- KNS 42 and SF 188, suggesting underlying genetic heterogeneity influences treatment response, warranting further mechanistic studies. CONCLUSION Combination therapies using abemaciclib and panobinostat, targeting CDK4/6 and histone deacetylation pathways, show promise against aggressive and treatment-resistant gliomas. Further investigation into these combination approaches is crucial to understand resistant mechanisms, optimize efficacy, and establish their clinical efficacy for improving glioma patient outcomes.