Role of the Histone Deacetylase Inhibitor Givinostat (ITF2357) in Treatment of CRLF2 Rearranged Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia

B Cell Precursor Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (BCP-ALL) represents 35% of all cancers in pediatric age group. The cure rate for this disease approaches 90% with current treatment regimens, however only a third of patients with relapse are cured. Therefore, there is an urgent need to focus on subgroups of patients with hallmarks of bad prognosis that could benefit from novel therapeutic approaches. Alterations of Cytokine Receptor-like Factor 2 (CRLF2), a negative prognostic factor in pediatric BCP-ALL, have been identified in up to 10% of patients. However these patients represent half of the high risk Ph-like ALL and of Down Syndrome-associated BCP-ALL. Rearrangements of CRLF2 result in the overexpression of this component of the heterodimeric cytokine receptor for thymic stromal lymphopoietin (TSLP) and is associated with activating mutations of the JAK-STAT pathway. Together these cause hyperactivation of JAK/STAT and PI3K/mTOR signaling. Inhibition of CRLF2/JAK2 signaling has the potential to become a therapeutic targeted intervention for this subgroup of poor prognostic patients.

Previous studies have shown that the HDAC inhibitor Givinostat/ITF2357 has potent anti-tumor activity against hematological malignancies, particularly JAK2V617F mutated myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) such as polycythemia vera, for which it has already a clinic application and established safety profile. We therefore studied the in vitro and in vivo efficacy of Givinostat in cases with CRLF2 rearrangements. Here we demonstrated that Givinostat inhibited proliferation and induced apoptosis of BCP-ALL CRLF2-rearranged MHH-CALL4 and MUTZ5 cell lines positive for exon 16 JAK2 mutations. Of note, the observed IC50 values for MHH-CALL4 were lower than those for the SET2 cell line positive control bearing JAK2V617F mutation, both for proliferation (IC50: 0.08±0.05µM vs. 0.14±0.03µM) and apoptosis (IC50: 0.17±0.03µM vs. 0.22±0.04µM). We next investigated the effect of Givinostat on blasts from CRLF2 rearranged BCP-ALL patient samples. For this purpose we developed xenograft models of human CRLF2 rearranged ALL to expand cells from patients and to recapitulate human leukemia in recipient mice. ALL blasts isolated from xenografts were co-cultured on OP9 stroma to perform ex vivo assays. Consistent with our findings in cell lines, Givinostat (0.2µM) reduced the % of live cells (Annexin V/Sytox negative) in all xenografts treated with the drug. In particular, after 72 hours, Givinostat was able to kill up to >90% of blast cells in all xenografts in contrast with the vehicle-treated samples which showed 25-60% of blasts still alive after treatment. The induction of cell death in Givinostat treated primografts was confirmed on primary samples from diagnosis using CyTOF which allowed us to observe that CD10+/CRLF2+ blasts were preferentially killed by the drug whereas CD45 high expressing cells (normal residue) remained unaffected by the treatment. Moreover, at low doses (0.2 µM), Givinostat downregulated genes of the JAK/STAT pathway (STAT5A, JAK2, IL7Rα, CRLF2, BCL2L1 and cMYC) and inhibited the basal and ligand induced signaling, reducing the phoshporylation of STAT5 in all tested primografts (mean fold decrease of pSTAT5: 2.4+0.6). Most importantly, to understand if the transcriptional downregulation of CRLF2 resulted in a functional effect, the downmodulation of CRLF2 protein was observed by flow cytometry (mean fold decrease 3.55+1.38). In vivo, Givinostat significantly reduced engraftment of human blasts in xenograft models of CRLF2 positive BCP-ALL (ranging from 1.9 to 34 fold decrease in bone marrow). Furthermore, Givinostat augmented the effect of chemotherapy in inhibiting proliferation and inducing apoptosis in CRLF2 rearranged cell lines and in primografts, in vitro. After 72 hours, the combined treatment reached 4.6-8.8 fold lower % of remaining viable blasts than chemotherapy alone (6.3-35.3% viable cells in chemotherapy-treated samples vs 1.4-4.3% of combination), 2.5-8.5 fold lower than Givinostat alone (4.3-36.4% vs 1.4-4.3%) and 2.4-13 fold lower than Methyl-prednisolone (5.2-39.1 vs 1-16.3%).

In conclusion, Givinostat may represent a novel and effective tool, in combination with current chemotherapy, to treat this difficult to handle subset of ALL and these data strongly argue for the translation of Givinostat in combination with conventional therapy into human trials.