Emerging strategies to target RAS signaling in human cancer therapy.

Background

HRAS was first regarded as oncogene due to a single-point mutation in 1982. Subsequently, NRAS and KRAS were identified quickly [ 1 ]. Since then, intense efforts have been made into the study of RAS [ 2 ]. Among the most common oncogenes regarding human cancers, mutant RAS affects approximately 19% of tumors [ 3 ].

RAS proteins belong to the family of GTPases and are considered as regulators of cellular proliferation, cell migration, apoptosis, and survival [ 2 ]. Mutant RAS proteins stimulate downstream signals and have significant oncogenic roles, and tumor cells harboring mutant RAS exhibit more aggressive phenotypes [ 4 , 5 ]. Accordingly, tumor patients with mutant RAS possess a worse prognosis and shorter overall survival (OS) compared with those patients without RAS mutation [ 6 , 7 ].

In clinical cancer patients, tumors harboring RAS mutations exhibit distinct clinicopathological characteristics and sensitivity to targeted therapy and chemotherapy. For example, RAS mutations are thought to correlate with features that predict aggressive behaviors, such as increased mitosis [ 8 , 9 ]. RAS mutational status is also correlated with the efficiency of targeted therapy. For example, anti-EGFR therapy is unsuitable for RAS-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients [ 10 – 13 ]. However, whether the mutational status of RAS affects chemotherapy efficiency remains controversial.

Direct targeting of RAS proteins used to be considered impossible because of the lack of drug-binding pockets on the surface of RAS proteins. However, great efforts are being made to determine various targeting strategies including: (1) targeting upstream molecules (e.g., PDE δ, SHP2, and STK19); (2) targeting the RAS proteins directly (e.g., by chemical compound or antibody); (3) targeting the downstream effectors (e.g., RAF, MEK, ERK, PI3K, and combined inhibition); (4) RNA interference (RNAi) of RAS expression; (5) targeting the distinct metabolic processes correlated with RAS mutation (e.g., micropinocytosis and autophagy); and (6) screening for synthetic lethal interactors [ 14 ]. In certain types of cancers, an objective response has been observed, including for KRAS G12C inhibitors AMG510 and MRTX849 in KRAS G12C -mutant lung or colorectal cancer patients, for the SRC homology-2-containing protein tyrosine phosphatase 2 (SHP2) inhibitor RMC-4630 in advanced NSCLC patients harboring KRAS mutation and for RAS/MEK inhibitor RO5126766 (VS-6766) combination with FAK inhibitor in KRAS mutation low-grade serous ovarian cancer (LGSOC) [ 15 – 17 ]. Remarkedly, based on a study of 124 advanced NSCLC patients harboring KRAS G12C mutation, Lumakras (sotorasib, AMG510) were approved for KRAS G12C NSCLC patients by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently, which is the first approved targeted therapy for tumors with KRAS mutation [ 18 , 19 ]. Therefore, here we fully review RAS mutations in human cancer and especially focus on emerging strategies that have been recently developed for RAS-targeted therapy.

RAS structure, function, and signaling

There are three RAS genes giving rise to four main protein products: KRAS4A, KRAS4B, NRAS, and HRAS. These isoforms share highly homogenous sequences or structures, and all possess conserved G domains (aa 1–166) and C-terminal hypervariable regions (HVRs) (aa 166–188/189) (Fig. 1 A). The G domain of RAS, consisting of switch I (aa 30–40), switch II (aa 60–76), and a P loop (aa 10–17), is responsible for the binding of downstream effectors to transduce downstream signals, while the C-terminal has vital role in RAS binding to membranes [ 20 ]. The final four amino acids, CAAX, of the C-terminal are the targets of posttranslational modifications, including iso-prenylation, proteolysis, and methylation which mediate RAS shift and binding to the cell membrane [ 21 ]. Fig. 1 Structure and switch of RAS. A Structure of RAS proteins, including the effector lobe (aa 1–86), allosteric lobe (aa 87–165), and HVR (aa 167–188/189). Switch I (aa 30–40) and switch II (aa 60–76) are located in the effector lobe and function in effector binding and GEF or GAP binding. The HVR domain contributes to RAS binding to cell membranes. B Inactive GDP-bound KRAS and GTP-bound KRAS cycle. The switch to RAS-GTP is stimulated by GEF, while GAPs accelerate the termination of the active state. The active GTP-bound RAS transfers the proliferation and differentiation signals through downstream effectors such as RAF, PI3K, and RalGEFs

RAS proteins cycle between the GDP-bound inactive state (RAS-GDP) and the GTP-bound active state (RAS-GTP) (Fig. 1 B). The inactive state of RAS exchanges the GDP/GTP binding when signals provoke it, and the switch to RAS-GTP is accelerated by GEFs (e.g., SOS1). The rate of the intrinsic GTP hydrolysis of RAS proteins is very slow; As a result, GAPs accelerate the termination of the active state by several orders of magnitude [ 22 ]. The active RAS-GTP, interacting with downstream effectors including RAF, PI3K, and Ral guanine exchange factors (RalGEFs), transduces the signal to regulate biological behavior [ 23 – 26 ]. The first two corresponding pathways, RAS–RAF–MEK–ERK and RAS–PI3K-AKT–mTORC, act as fundamental signaling pathways of RAS proteins [ 24 ]. Mutations in the three RAS isoforms, G12, G13, and Q61, can abolish the intrinsic GTPase activity of RAS and increase the GEF-mediated exchange rate [ 27 – 29 ]. As a result, RAS remains a continuously active GTP-bound state and hence is oncogenic.

RAS mutation frequency and hotspots in human cancers

RAS mutations occur in approximately 19% of all cancers, occupying a prominent role in tumorigenesis and tumor progression [ 3 ]. Among which, KRAS is the most frequently mutated isoform, followed by NRAS, and HRAS. RAS isoform mutations show selectivity in various human cancers (Fig. 2 A). For example, KRAS mutations often occur in pancreatic duct adenocarcinoma (PDAC), lung adenocarcinoma (LUAC), and colon and rectal adenocarcinoma (with mutation frequencies of 66.1%, 16.5%, 30.3%, and 34.4%, respectively; COSMIC v94), whereas in hematological malignancies such as chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML), NRAS mutation frequencies are relatively high at up to 13.1% and 13.6% (COSMIC v94), respectively, reflecting the rates in malignant melanoma, thyroid carcinoma, and larynx carcinoma, which have NRAS mutation frequencies of 18.6%, 8.1%, and 9.7%, respectively (COSMIC v94). Although HRAS mutations are negligible in human cancers, salivary gland carcinoma, mouth carcinoma, and vulva carcinoma possess relatively high rates of HRAS mutation. Fig. 2 RAS mutational frequency and hotspots in human cancer. A The mutational frequency of KRAS, NRAS, and HRAS in various cancers. B The proportion of RAS mutation hotspots. G12, G13, and Q61 occupy 96–98% of all mutations in KRAS and NRAS isoforms. The data are taken from the Catalogue of Somatic Mutations in Cancer (COSMIC v94). PDAC, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma; LUAD, lung adenocarcinoma; CMML, chronic myelomonocytic leukemia; AML, acute myeloid leukemia; LUSC, lung squamous cell carcinoma; CML, chronic myelogenous leukemia; HCC, hepatocellular carcinoma; ccRCC, clear cell renal cell carcinoma

Although > 100 mutation sites have been identified in all three RAS isoforms, the most prominent mutational hotspots are G12, G13, and Q61, occupying almost 96%–98% of all mutations in KRAS and NRAS isoforms, whereas the proportion of HRAS mutations is relatively low (COSMIC v94). Furthermore, different RAS isoforms exhibit varied hotspot preference for G12, G13, and Q61. Approximately 80% of mutations reside at G12 for KRAS mutations; in contrast, Q61 mutations are more common in NRAS, accounting for 60% of all mutations. Regarding HRAS, the mutational frequency among the three sites is similar (Fig. 2 B). The underlying mechanism of codon-specific RAS mutations in specific tumor types remains unclear. Recent observations indicate that codon-specific mutations that confer a fitness advantage to tumor cells may explain the selection. For example, mouse models of knocked-in NRAS Q61R exhibited melanoma formation, but those with NRAS G12D did not; the mechanism lied in increased GTP binding affinity and reduced intrinsic GTPase activity compared with NRAS G12D [ 30 ]. In fact, the isoform, codon, and frequency of RAS mutation vary by tissue type.

Clinical implications of RAS mutations

Correlation of RAS mutations and clinicopathological features

RAS mutational status correlates with clinicopathological features. Patients harboring mutant RAS exhibit distinct phenotypes, clinical pathology classification, and staging (Table 1 ). RAS mutations represent aggressive biological behavior of thyroid cancer and colorectal cancer [ 31 ]. As a result, colorectal cancer patients harboring KRAS or NRAS have shorter overall survival (OS) [ 32 ]. Additionally, KRAS status will shift the metastatic profile of colorectal cancer; KRAS-mutant tumors tend to spread to the lungs, whilst wild-type tumors have a higher propensity of invasion to the liver [ 33 , 34 ]. For patients with colorectal liver metastases receiving liver resection, studies have indicated that KRAS mutations correlate with worse recurrence-free survival (RFS) and OS [ 35 – 38 ]. In melanoma, NRAS mutations correlate with the presence of mitoses, lower tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) grade, extremity location, thick tumors, and higher AJCC stage [ 8 , 9 , 39 ]. In ovarian cancer, significant associations are found between KRAS mutations and lower grade, mucinous histological subtype, and positive progesterone expression [ 40 ]. These findings suggest that patients with RAS mutations possess distinct clinicopathological features. Table 1 Clinicopathological features of patients with RAS mutations Tumor type N RAS mutation Mutation rate Mutation site Clinicopathologic features References Melanoma 912 NRAS 13.0% Codon 12, 13, 61 Presence of mitoses; lower TIL grade; anatomic site other than scalp/necks [ 39 ] Thyroid cancer 107 HRAS, NRAS, KRAS 32.7% NM Poorly or undifferentiated type; [ 31 ] mCRC 484 KRAS, NRAS 51.6% Codon 12, 13, 61, 146 More mucinous type; higher lung metastases tendency; right-side preference of primary tumors [ 206 ] CRC 926 KRAS 14.7% Codon 12, 13 Villous histology preference; advanced adenomas; older age [ 207 ] NSCLC 6583 KRAS 9.2% Codon 12, 13 More mucinous type; frequent poorly-differentiated grade; solid pattern tumors preference; larger sized tumors [ 208 ] IMA 45 KRAS 48.9% Codon 12 Located in the lower lung lobe; lower frequency of nuclear atypia; lower proportion of geminin-positive cell [ 209 ] EOC 153 KRAS 11.1% Codon 12, 13, 61 More mucinous type; lower differentiation grade; higher PR expression; higher pT classifications [ 40 ] SIA 190 KRAS 32.1% Codon 12, 13 More frequent pancreatic invasion [ 210 ] EOC epithelial ovarian cancer, SIA small intestinal adenocarcinoma, IMA invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma of the lung, CRC colorectal cancer, mCRC metastatic colorectal cancer, PR progesterone receptor, TIL tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, NM not mentioned

Correlations of RAS mutational status and treatment efficiency of targeted therapy, chemotherapy, and/or immunotherapy

Recent studies have identified correlations between RAS mutational status and the treatment efficiency of targeted therapy, chemotherapy, and immunotherapy (Table 2 ). KRAS mutational status predicts the response to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) therapy in patients with mCRC. Patients with KRAS mutations in exons 2 do not benefit from anti-EGFR therapy; either anti-EGFR antibody alone or combined with chemotherapy [ 10 – 12 , 41 ]. However, there seems to be an exception for patients with KRAS G13D , who benefit from cetuximab [ 42 , 43 ]. In contrast with the clear predicted significance of KRAS mutational status for anti-EGFR therapy in mCRC, whether it can be utilized in NSCLC remains controversial. An association between KRAS mutations and lack of response to anti-EGFR has been observed in the clinic [ 44 , 45 ]; thus, it is reasonable to hypothesize that NSCLC tumors with KRAS mutations are resistant to anti-EGFR therapy. However, increased studies have indicated that KRAS mutational status does not have predictive significance in the selection of patients for anti-EGFR therapy in NSCLC [ 46 – 49 ]. Therefore, KRAS mutational status currently provides insufficient evidence to recommend the selection of patients for anti-EGFR treatment in NSCLC. Table 2 Clinical trials in terms of the predictive value of RAS mutational status to treatment response Study No. Total No. Mut Tumor stage Treat OS (mon) HR (95%CI) P PFS (mon) HR (95%CI) P References Targeted therapy Lievre, A., et al 89 24 mCRC Cetuximab for KMP vs KWP 10.1 vs 14.3 ND .026 2.4 vs 7.3 ND . 0001 [ 11 ] NCT00079066 572 164 mCRC Cetuximab + BSC vs BSC For KMP 4.5 vs 4.6 0.98 (0.70–1.37) .89 1.8 vs 1.8 0.99 (0.73–1.35) .96 [ 211 ] Amado, R. G., et al 427 184 mCRC Panitumumab + BSC vs BSC For KMP 4.9 vs 4.4 1.02 (0.75–1.39) ND 1.7 vs 1.7 0.99 (0.73–1.36) ND [ 212 ] OPUS 337 99 mCRC Cetuximab + FOLFOX4 vs FOLFOX4 for KMP NA ND ND 5.5 vs 8.6 1.83 (1.10–3.05) .0192 [ 213 ] NCT00154102 1198 397 mCRC Cetuximab + FOLFIRI vs FOLFIRI for KMP 16.2 vs 16.7 1.035 (0.834–1.284) .75 7.4 vs 7.7 1.17 (.887–1.544) .26 [ 214 ] NCT00364013 1096 440 mCRC Panitumumab + FOLFOX4 vs FOLFOX4 for KMP and NMP 15.6 vs 19.2 1.25 (1.02–1.55) .03 7.3 vs 8 1.31 (1.07–1.60) ND [ 41 ] NCT00339183 1083 486 mCRC Panitumumab + FOLFIRI vs FOLFIRI for KMP 11.8 vs 11.1 ND ND 5.0 vs 4.9 ND .14 [ 215 ] NCT00145314 1064 195 mCRCIV Cetuximab + FLOX vs FLOX KMP for KMP 21.1 vs 20.4 1.03 (0.68–1.57) .89 9.2 vs 7.8 0.71 (0.50–1.03) .07 [ 216 ] NCT01000025 720 78 NSCLC IV Dacomitinib vs placebo for KMP 5.82 vs 8.28 2.10 (1.05–4.22) NA 1.61 vs 1.86 1.34 (0.78–2.29) ND [ 217 ] NCT00637910 219 51 NSCLC IV Docetaxel vs Erlotinib for KMP NA 0.81 (0.45–1.47) ND NA 0.89 (0.51–1.57) ND [ 218 , 219 ] TRIBUTE 274 55 NSCLC IIIB or IV Erlotinib + CP vs CP for KMP 4.4 vs 13.5 NA .019 NA ND ND [ 44 ] TRUST 311 17 NSCLC IIIB or IV Erlotinib for KMP vs KWP NA 1.64 (0.97–2.80) .064 NA 1.56 (0.92–2.65) .094 [ 220 ] NCIC CTG PA.3 569 92 aPC Erlotinib + Gem vs placebo + Gem for KMP 6.0 vs 7.4 1.07 (0.68–1.66) .78 NA ND ND [ 221 , 222 ] NCT00440167 281 121 aPC Gem + Erlotinib/Cap or Cap + Erlotinib/Gem for KWP vs KMP 7.9 vs 5.7 1.68 (1.17–2.41) .005 NA ND ND [ 223 ] NCT01267344 122 44 aBTC Gem, Ox + Cetuximab vs Gem, Ox For KMP NA 0.73 (0.39–1.35) .313 NA ND ND [ 224 ] Chemotherapy CALGB 89803 508 178 CRC III FU/LV or IFL for KMP vs KWP NA 0.86 (0.60–1.23) ND NA 0.95 (0.70–1.28) ND [ 225 ] TRIBUTE 274 55 NSCLC IIIB or IV CP for KMP vs KWP 13.5 vs 11.3 ND ND NA ND ND [ 44 ] OPUS 337 99 mCRC FOLFOX4 for KMP vs KWP NA ND ND 8.6 vs 7.2 1.404 (0.867–2.271) ND [ 213 ] KMP KRAS-mutant patients, NMP NRAS-mutant patients, KWP wild-type KRAS patients, BSC best supportive care, mCRC metastatic colorectal cancer, NSCLC non-small-cell lung carcinoma, aPC advanced pancreatic cancer, aBTC advanced biliary tract cancer, FOLFOX4 oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin, FOLFIRI 5-fluorouracil, folinic acid, and irinotecan, Gem gemcitabine, CP carboplatin and paclitaxel, Cap capecitabine, Ox oxaliplatin, IFL fluorouracil [5-FU], leucovorin, and irinotecan, FU/LV 5FU + leucovorin, NA none, ND not determined

Whether RAS mutational status influences chemotherapy efficiency remains unclear, and the predictive value of mutant RAS status to the response to chemotherapy is controversial [ 50 – 54 ]. Improved clinical response to chemotherapy was observed in KRAS-mutant patients suffering from mCRC and pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm grade-3 (PanNEN-G3) [ 54 – 56 ], while in other clinical trials, KRAS mutational status did not have prognostic value for stage II/III colon cancer receiving either FU/FA alone or in combination with irinotecan [ 52 ]. Further analyses from the PETACC-8 trial even suggested that KRAS mutation was associated with shorter DFS and OS for stage III colon cancer treated with leucovorin, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin alone or combination with cetuximab, while in patients with microsatellite instability (MSI), KRAS mutational status did not have prognostic value [ 50 , 53 ].

With the emergence of drugs targeting negative immune regulators containing programmed cell death protein 1(PD1), programmed cell death 1 ligand 1(PD-L1), or cytotoxic lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA-4), immune therapy represented by immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) has revolutionized cancer treatment [ 57 ]. It has been found that high PD-L1 expression was significantly correlated with the presence of KRAS mutations in pulmonary sarcomatous carcinoma and lung adenocarcinoma [ 58 , 59 ], indicating that patients with KRAS mutations may exhibit a more efficient response to ICB. In addition, ICB tended to show consistently higher efficiency in KRAS-mutant NSCLC [ 60 ]. However, oncogenic KRAS promotes tumor cell immune escape and immune therapy resistance through attracting immune-suppressive cells or suppressing cytotoxic cells in a colorectal cancer mouse model [ 61 , 62 ]. Therefore, whether RAS mutational status should be considered before administering ICB therapy warrants further study.

RAS targeting strategies

Drugging RAS proteins directly used to be considered impossible because of the lack of pockets for drug binding on the surface of RAS proteins, and hence, the focus shifted to upstream and downstream proteins of RAS with the aim of suppressing the oncogenic signal. Recent studies on RAS structure, function, and signaling have revealed new insights on the development of RAS targeting strategies. Targeting upstream proteins, downstream proteins, and RAS directly, as well as RNA interference, represent the direct suppression of RAS oncogenic signals. Preclinical or clinical drugs that directly disturb RAS oncogenic signaling are shown in Fig. 3 . In addition, RAS mutations bring specific characteristics, such as distinct metabolic processes and antigens, revealing indirect strategies that make targeting these characteristics feasible [ 63 , 64 ]. Here, we summarize promising drugs with direct and indirect strategies in preclinical or clinical development (Tables 3 and 4 ). Fig. 3 Preclinical and clinical drugs targeting RAS-mutant tumors. (a) Targeting upstream molecules of RAS. Promising targets include PDEδ, SHP2, and STK19. (b) Targeting RAS directly, especially G12C covalent binders. (c) Targeting downstream RAF–MEK–ERK signaling. (d) Targeting downstream PI3K–AKT–mTOR signaling. (e) RNA interference of mutant RAS mRNA. Molecules that underwent clinical trials are indicated in green, those that are now under preclinical evaluation are indicated in lack. Napa, nanoparticle Table 3 Potential molecules targeting RAS directly in preclinical or clinical trials Target RAS directly DACI HEK-293 T KRAS Mut Pre NA Inhibit SOS-Ras interaction [ 88 ] BAY-293 NSCLC cell lines KRAS G12C Pre NA Inhibit SOS-Ras interaction [ 90 ] BI 3406 Cell lines KRAS Mut lnc Pre NA Inhibit SOS-Ras interaction [ 226 ] BI 1701963 Solid tumors KRAS Mut Clinical I Recruiting Inhibit SOS-Ras interaction Single agent or comb Trametinib NCT04111458 SML-10-70-1 NSCLC cell lines KRAS G12C Pre NA Inhibit GN binding [ 101 , 102 ] KRA-533 NSCLC xenografts KRAS K117A Pre NA Inhibit GN binding [ 103 ] Rigosertib PanIN; CRC NSCLC xenograft models KRAS G12D G13D G12S Pre NA Inhibit Ras effectors interaction [ 94 ] Kobe2602 Kobe0065 CRC xenograft models KRAS G12V Pre NA Inhibit Ras effectors interaction [ 104 ] ARS853 NSCLC cell lines KRAS G12C Pre NA Target inactive Ras [ 91 , 92 ] ARS1620 NSCLC xenograft models KRAS G12C Pre NA Target inactive Ras [ 93 ] LY3537982 NSCLC PDX KRAS G12C Pre NA Target inactive Ras [ 227 ] MRTX1133 PDAC xenograft KRAS G12D Pre NA Target inactive Ras [ 100 ] 2C07 NA HRAS M72C Pre NA Target inactive Ras [ 96 ] BI-2852 NCI-H358 cell KRAS G12D Pre NA Target surface pocket of RAS [ 97 ] AMG510 Mut solid tumors KRAS G12C Clinical I/II Recruiting Target inactive Ras Single agent NCT03600883 () (CodeBreaK 100) Mut solid tumors KRAS G12C Clinical I Recruiting Target inactive Ras Single agent NCT04380753 (CodeBreaK105) NSCLC KRAS G12C Clinical III Not yet recruiting Target inactive Ras Compare with Docetaxel NCT04303780 (CodeBreaK200) Advanced solid tumors KRAS G12C Clinical Ib/II Recruiting Targeting inactive Ras Comb with MEKi, PD1i, PDL1i, SHP2i Pan-ErbBi, EGFRi + chemotherapy NCT04185883 (CodeBreaK101) MRTX849 Advanced solid tumors KRAS G12C Clinical I/II Recruiting Target inactive Ras Single agent and comb With Pembrolizumab/Cetuximab/Afatinib NCT03785249 Advanced solid tumors KRAS G12C Clinical I/II Recruiting Comb with TNO155 NCT04330664 LY3499446 Solid tumors NSCLC, CRC KRAS G12C Clinical I/II Terminated Target inactive Ras Single agent or comb Single agent or comb with Abemaciclib/Cetuximab Erlotinib/Docetaxel NCT04165031 JNJ-74699157 Solid tumors NSCLC, CRC Neoplasms KRAS G12C Clinical I Completed Target inactive Ras NCT04006301 mCRC metastatic colorectal cancer, NSCLC non-small-cell lung carcinoma, PanIN pancreatic intra-epithelial neoplasia, PDAC pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, Mut mutation, lnc include, means including patients with RAS mutation, NA, none Table 4 Potential molecules targeting RAS signaling in preclinical or clinical trials Targets Molecule Tumor Type/model RAS Mut Phase Status Notes Referencess Target the upstream FTase/GGTase Antroquinonol PDAC KRAS mut lnc Clinical I/II Recruiting Single agent NCT03310632 NSCLC NM Clinical I Completed Single agent NCT01134016 tipifarnib TC HNSCC SCC HRAS Clinical II Completed Single agent NCT02383927 [ 69 ] UC HRAS Clinical II NM Single agent [ 70 ] PDEδ Deltarasin Xenografted PDAC modelss KRAS Pre NA Single agent [ 75 ] Deltazinones PDAC cell lines KRAS Pre NA Single agent [ 77 ] Deltasonamides PDAC cell lines KRAS Pre NA Single agent [ 228 ] NHTD Xenografted NSCLC models KRAS Pre NA Single agent [ 79 ] STK19 ZT-12–037-01 (1a) Melanoma xenograft models NRAS Pre NA Single agent [ 86 ] Chelidonine Melanoma xenograft models, cell lines NRAS Pre NA Single agent [ 87 ] SHP2 SHP099 PDAC, NSCLC xenograft models KRAS Pre NA Single agent [ 84 ] JAB-3068 NSCLC, HNC, ESC, Other solid tumors NM Clinical I/II Recruiting Single agent NCT03565003 JAB-3312 NSCLC, CRC, PDAC, BC, ESC KRAS G12 mut lnc Clinical I Recruiting Single agent NCT04045496 TNO155 NSCLC, CRC KRAS G12C Mut lnc Clinical I Recruiting Single agent NCT03114319 RMC-4630 PC, OVCA, OEC, ESC, NF1 KRAS G12 Mut lnc Clinical I Recruiting Single agent NCT03634982 Solid tumors KRAS mut lnc Clinical Ib/II Recruiting Comb with Cobimetinib NCT03989115 Target the downstream RAF HM95573 Solid tumors KRAS, NRAS Clinical I Completed Single agent NCT03118817 RO5126766(VS-6766) NSCLC KRAS Clinical I Active, not recruiting Dual MEK/Raf inhibitor NCT03681483 NSCLC KRAS Clinical I Recruiting Comb with FAK inhibitor (VS-6063) NCT03875820 LGSOC KRAS Clinical II Recruiting Comb with FAK inhibitor (VS-6063) NCT04625270 LXH254 NSCLC, MM KRAS, NRAS Clinical Ib Recruiting Comb with MEK, ERK, or CD4/6 inhibitors NCT02974725 Lifirafenib MM, TC, OC, NSCLC, CRC, EC KRAS, NRAS Clinical I completed Single agent [ 131 ] CCT3833 MM RAS Mut lnc Clinical I completed Single agent NCT02437227 MEK1/2 PD-0325901 NSCLC KRAS Clinical I/II Active, not recruiting Comb with CD4/6 inhibitor (Palbociclib) NCT02022982 NSCLC KRAS Clinical I/II Recruiting Comb with pan-HER inhibitor (Dacomitinib) NCT02039336 NSCLC, EC, CRC, OC, TC, PC, MM KRAS Clinical I/II Recruiting Comb with dual BRAF and EGFR, Inhibitor (BGB-283) NCT03905148 MEK162 NSCLC KRAS Clinical I/II Recruiting Comb with CDK4/6 inhibitor (Palbocicib) NCT03170206 NSCLC KRAS Clinical I/Ib Active, not recruiting Comb with EGFR inhibitor (Erlotinib) NCT01859026 PC CRC NSCLC MM KRAS NRAS Mut lnc Clinical I Completed Comb with PI3K inhibitor (BKM120) NCT01363232 Solid tumors KRAS NRAS Mut lnc Clinical I Completed comb with AKT inhibitor (BEZ235) NCT01337765 PC, NSCLC KRAS NRAS Clinical Ib/II Terminated Comb with PARP and PDL1 inhibitor (Talazoparib, Avelumab) NCT03637491 Cobimetinib NSCLC, CRC KRAS Clinical I Completed Comb with MEHD7945A NCT01986166 Trametinib NSCLC KRAS, NRAS Mut lnc Clinical II Completed Single agent NCT01362296 mCRC KRAS Mut lnc Clinical Ib/II Terminated Comb with CDK4/6 inhibitor (ribociclib) NCT02703571 NSCLC, PC KRAS Clinical Ib/II Recruiting Comb with Bcl-2 inhibitor (Navitoclax) NCT02079740 Multiple Myeloma KRAS NRAS Mut lnc Clinical I Recruiting Comb with BRAF inhibitor (Dabrafenib) NCT03091257 NSCLC KRAS Mut lnc Clinical I/II Active, not recruiting Comb with PD1 inhibitor (Pembrolizumab) NCT03225664 MM NRAS Clinical Ib/II I/II Terminated Comb with ERBB3 inhibitor (CDX-3379) NCT03580382 Solid tumors DTC NRAS lnc Clinical I NA Comb with VEGF inhibitor (Pazopanib) [ 13 ] Selumetinib NSCLC KRAS Clinical II Withdrawn Comb with PDL1 inhibitor (durvalumab) NCT03004105 NSCLC KRAS Clinical I/II Recruiting Comb with EGFR inhibitor (Afatinib) NCT02450656 mCRC KRAS Mut lnc Clinical II Completed Comb with chemotherapy (Irinotecan) NCT01116271 NSCLC KRAS Mut lnc Clinical Ib/II Active, not recruiting Comb with mTOR inhibitor (AZD2014) NCT02583542 mCRC KRAS Clinical II Completed Comb with AKT inhibitor (MK-2206) NCT01333475 NSCLC KRAS Clinical III Active, not recruitingrecruiting Comb with chemotherapy (Docetaxel) NCT01933932 Pimasertib MM NRAS Clinical II Completed Single agent NCT01693068 FCN-159 MM NRAS Clinical I Recruiting Single agent NCT03932253 ERK1/2 ASN007 MM, CRC, NSCLC KRAS, NRAS Mut lnc Clinical I Completed Single agent NCT03415126 Ulixertinib Solid tumors KRAS, NRAS HRAS Mut lnc Clinical II Suspended Single agent NCT03698994 KO-947 Solid tumors KRAS, NRAS HRAS Mut lnc Clinical I Terminated Single agent NCT03051035 SCH772984 Pancreatic KRAS Pre NA Single agent [ 154 ] Xenograft Models AZD0364 NSCLC CRC Xenograft Models KRAS Pre NA Comb with MEK inhibitor (selumetinib) [ 157 ] PI3K PF-05212384 NSCLC KRAS Mut Clinical I Terminated Comb with MEK inhibitor (PD-0325901) NCT01347866 BKM120 Solid tumors KRAS Mut lnc Clinical I Completed Comb with MEK inhibitor (GSK1120212) NCT01155453 GSK2126458 Solid tumors KRAS Mut lnc Clinical I Terminated Comb with MEK inhibitor (GSK1120212) NCT01248858 Pictilisib Solid tumors KRAS Mut lnc Clinical I Terminated Comb with MEK inhibitor (cobimetinib) NCT00996892 Akt MK2206 NSCLC KRAS Clinical I Completed Comb with MEK inhibitor (AZD6244) NCT01021748 CRC KRAS Clinical II Completed Comb with MEK inhibitor (AZD6244) NCT01333475 GSK2141795 AML KRAS/NRAS Mut Clinical II Terminated Comb with MEK inhibitor (Trametinib) NCT01907815 GSK2110183 Solid tumors KRAS Mut lnc Clinical I Completed Comb with MEK inhibitor (Trametinib) NCT01476137 mTOR TAK-228 SCLC KRAS Clinical II Completed Single agent NCT02417701 MK8669 NSCLC KRAS Clinical II Terminated Single agent NCT00818675 Temsirolimus mCRC KRAS Clinical II Completed Comb with chemotherapy (Irinotecan) NCT00827684 Everolimus mCRC KRAS Clinical II Completed Single agent NCT00419159 NSCLC KRAS Clinical I Completed Comb with Sorafenib NCT00933777 EC KRAS Clinical II Completed Single agent NCT00870337 [ 184 ] RNA interference siRNA-Loaded nanoparticles NSCLC cell lines KRAS Pre NA Single agent [ 114 ] AZD4785 NSCLC mCRC KRAS Clinical I Completed Single agent NCT03101839 siG12D LODERAZD4785 LAPCNSCLC, mCRC KRAS G12D Clinical I Completed Single agent [ 120 ] iExosomes G12D PDAC KRAS G12D Clinical I Recruiting Single agent NCT03608631 siRNA V941 Advanced PDAC, CRC, NSCLC KRAS Mut Clinical I Recruiting Single agent or Comb with Pembrolizumab NCT03948763 Target metabolic process Chloroquine PDAC, MM xenograft models KRAS, NRAS Pre NA Comb with MEK inhibitor (Trametinib) [ 191 ] PDAC xenograft KRAS Pre NA Comb with ERK inhibitor [ 190 ] Models (SCH772984) Other strategies Anti-KRAS PC, GC, RC, GICA KRAS G12D Clinical I/II Suspended Single agent NCT03190941 G12 mTCR G12V Mut NCT03745326 PBL CRISPR/Cas9 NSCLC xenograft modelsMODEL KRAS G12S Pre NA Single agent [ 118 ] System Model PROTACs NSCLC cell lines KRAS G12C Pre NA Single agent [ 194 , 195 ] NIH-3T3 KRAS G12V Pre NA dTAG system [ 198 ] NIH-3T3 KRAS G12V Pre NA HaloPROTACs [ 197 ] A549 HRAS Pre NA HaloPROTAC comb with [ 199 ] KRAS G12S L-AdPROM SW480 KRAS Pre NA PROTAC (PDEδ) [ 200 ] NSCLC cell lines KRAS mut Pre NA PROTAC (TBK1) [ 201 ] mCRC metastatic colorectal cancer, NSCLC non-small-cell lung carcinoma, PC pancreatic cancer, OVCA ovarian cancer; OEC, ovarian epithelial cancer, ESC esophageal carcinoma, NF1 neurofibromatosis type 1, GC gastric cancer, CC colon cancer, RC rectal cancer, UC urothelial carcinoma, GICA gastrointestinal cancer, EC endometrial cancer, PanIN pancreatic intra-epithelial neoplasia, LAPC locally advanced pancreatic cancer, MM malignant melanoma, PBL peripheral blood lymphocytes, Mut mutation, lnc include, means including patients with RAS mutation, NA, none. PROTACs PROteolysis TArgeting Chimeras

Targeting upstream proteins

RAS proteins shift to the membrane for their biological activity. As a result, the idea of disrupting RAS translocation to cell membrane was proposed, especially in confronting the difficult approach of direct targeting of RAS. The initial attempt was to drug farnesyltransferase (FTase), which modifies the CAAX motif of RAS by farnesyl moiety addition. However, FTase inhibitors (FTIs) exhibited disappointing results in clinical trials toward to pancreatic cancer, which mainly possess KRAS mutation [ 65 – 67 ], and subsequent research revealed KRAS and NRAS gained alternative modifications by geranylgeranyltransferases (GGTase) in cells treated with FTIs [ 68 ]. Noteworthily, tipifarnib, a FTase inhibitor, exhibited encouraging efficiency in cancer harboring HRAS mutation [ 69 , 70 ]. Although simultaneous inactivation of FTase and GGTase exhibited tumorigenesis inhibition in mouse models [ 71 , 72 ], the toxicity associated with GGTIs limited their utility, thus reducing the benefit of targeting KRAS through combined FTase and GGTase inhibition [ 73 ]. Remarkedly, a bioactive natural compound from antrodia camphorata, antroquinonol, suppressed the proliferation of tumor cells in vitro and in vivo. The potential mechanism was the inhibition of RAS through inactivation of FTase and GGTase [ 74 ].

Recently, another target, phenyl-binding protein phosphodiesterase δ (PDEδ), has attracted attention. PDEδ facilitates RAS protein transport to either the endosomes or the Golgi, from where RAS shifts to the plasma membrane. It was found to disrupt the interaction between KRAS–PDEδ to suppresses KRAS signaling, thus impairing the proliferation of PDAC cells in vitro and in vivo [ 75 , 76 ]. The three molecules, NHTD, deltarasin, and deltazinone, competitively bind the prenyl-binding pocket of PDEδ, exhibiting the ability to impair the RAS protein stimulation at the membrane and further suppressing oncogenic KRAS signaling [ 77 – 79 ]. However, additional clinical study is required to test their toxicity and efficiency in patients.

In addition to interfering with the plasma localization of RAS proteins, targeting kinases or phosphatases that regulate RAS activity also represent an alternative option. Tyrosine-protein phosphatase non-receptor type 11 (PTPN11), also known as SHP2, is a mediator associated the stimulation of the downstream RAS–RAF–MEK–ERK pathway, promoting MAPK signal activation [ 80 ]. Although SHP099, an SHP2 inhibitor, displayed minimal anti-proliferation effects in KRAS or BRAF mutant cell lines in vitro, it shrank KRAS-mutant tumors in vivo [ 81 , 82 ]. In addition, combined inhibition of MEK and SHP2 showed high efficiency in engineered or xenograft KRAS-mutant pancreas, ovarian, and lung cancer [ 81 , 83 – 85 ], overcoming the rapid resistance to MEK inhibitor as a single therapy. Recently, the SHP2 inhibitor RMC-4630 exhibited an encouraging disease control rate (DCR) of 67% for advanced NSCLC patients harboring KRAS mutations [ 16 ]. The novel SHP2 inhibitors JAB-3068 and JAB-3312 are also under clinical investigation for safety and preliminary antitumor activity in KRAS-mutant solid tumors ( NCT03565003 and NCT04045496 , respectively).

The serine/threonine kinase STK19 was recently identified as another NRAS activator. STK19 phosphorylates NRAS protein at serine 89 and improved NRAS binding to its effectors. Consequently, STK19 inhibitor ZT-12-037-01 (1a) could inhibit oncogenic NRAS-mediated melanoma growth in vitro and in vivo [ 86 ]. Recently, we screened out a new pharmacological inhibitor of STK19 named chelidonine, which could suppress the growth of NRAS-mutant tumors in vitro and in vivo [ 87 ].

Direct targeting of RAS

Drugging RAS proteins directly used to be considered impossible. Although the guanine nucleotide (GN) binding site seems an ideal pocket, the sub-nanomolar affinity of GDP and GTP binding to RAS and their low intercellular concentrations make competitive nucleotide binding challenging. However, in recent years, targeting of RAS proteins directly has had a resurgence because of new findings in its crystal structure. The strategies include inhibiting the SOS–RAS interaction, trapping RAS in its inactive conformation, targeting the GN binding site, and hindering RAS effector interaction. Remarkedly, the KRAS G12C inhibition acquired great breakthrough, especially with the recent approval of AMG510 for KRAS G12C NSCLC patients, the history of undruggable target of RAS in the clinic ended.

First, inhibition of SOS-mediated nucleotide exchange activity was shown to make sense [ 88 , 89 ]. DACI, a small molecule identified in a fragment screen, was found to bind the pocket of the RAS–SOS interaction surface. DACI restrained nucleotide exchange by blocking the interaction of RAS and SOS and inhibiting RAS activation in transformed cells [ 88 ]. Furthermore, another compound, BAY-293, selectively suppresses KRAS–SOS interaction with a proper IC50, is thus a promising compound for further investigation [ 90 ]. Remarkedly, another compound that disturbs RAS–SOS interactions, BI 1701963, is being evaluated for its efficiency alone or in combination with trametinib in solid tumors with KRAS mutation ( NCT04111458 ).

Second, to suppress the activation of RAS, small molecules targeting inactive RAS proteins by a trapping mechanism is an alternative option [ 91 ]. ARS853 was identified as a selective inhibitor against the KRAS G12C mutation by covalently reacting with RAS-GDP complex to trap it in its inactive state. ARS853 selectively inhibited downstream signaling and proliferation of cell lines harboring KRAS G12C mutation [ 92 ]. Although ARS853 exhibited inhibitory effects in vitro, its poor stability in plasma (t1/2 < 20 min) makes further in vivo study challenging. Considering its potential clinical application, ARS1620 was designed to covalently and selectively react with GDP-bound RAS (RAS-GDP), displaying appropriate pharmacokinetics at the same time. ARS1620 exhibited selective tumor growth repression in a mouse tumor model [ 93 ]. Based on ARS1620, a novel-generation KRAS G12C inhibitor, ARS3248 (JNJ-74699157) is undergoing clinical study of its safety and antitumor activity in patients with advanced solid tumors harboring KRAS G12C mutation ( NCT04006301 ). The biochemical mechanism of ARS853 and ARS1620 that possesses potent binding of mutant KRAS protein lies in KRAS-driven catalysis of the reaction between small molecules and Cys12 in the KRAS G12C mutant [ 94 , 95 ]. Despite ARS853 and ARS1620 suppressing RAS activation, limitations exist because most RAS proteins remain in the GTP-bound conformation. As a result, 2C07 was screened, which could bind in both a nucleotide state and still keep the trapping mechanism of G12C binders [ 96 ]. Another chemical probe, BI-2852, which is mechanistically diverse to covalent KRAS G12C inhibitors, was designed to bind with the KRAS pocket with nanomolar affinity [ 97 ]. Surprisingly, an objective response has been observed in KRAS G12C lung cancer or colorectal patients when treated with KRAS G12C inhibitors AMG510 and MRTX849 [ 98 , 99 ]. Regarding another common mutation, KRAS G12D , MRTX1133 demonstrated clear tumor regression in KRAS G12D positive preclinical cancer models, including pancreatic adenocarcinoma xenograft models [ 100 ].

Third, though targeting the GN binding site has been regarded as unfeasible, a GDP analogue, SML-8–73-1, can form covalent bonds with the GN site and prevent further nucleotide exchange, making targeting the GN site possible. Further, the compound stabilizes GDP-bound KRAS G12C , whereas it is not easy to penetrate cells and has limited selectivity [ 101 , 102 ]. Recently, a KRAS agonist, KRA-533, was identified to suppress mutant KRAS-driven lung cancer in vitro and in vivo, binding the GN binding site to prevent the exchange of GTP to GDP [ 103 ].

Fourth, disrupting the RAS effector interaction also represents a direction of RAS inhibition. Kobe0062 and Kobe0065 display inhibitory activity against HRAS and RAF interactions, and they suppress the growth of xenograft tumors harboring KRAS G12C [ 104 ]. Moreover, rigosertib was proposed to inhibit RAS signaling as a RAS mimetic to competitively bind to RAS effectors and interfere with their ability to bind to RAS [ 94 ].

Considering the essentiality of normal RAS protein, mutant RAS proteins are the focus of drug development, which means the drugs usually target one or several subtypes of RAS mutations. However, a pan-RAS inhibitor, compound 3144, exhibited cellular lethality and tumor growth inhibition without any adverse effects. Compound 3144 was detected to bind to KRAS G12D mutation, wild-type KRAS, NRAS, and HRAS at D38, A59, and Y32. This indicates that pan-RAS inhibitors may have antitumor efficiency and targeting multiple RAS mutations by one compound is feasible [ 105 ].

KRAS G12C inhibitor AMG510

The identification of a cryptic pocket (H95/Y96/Q99) in KRAS G12C enabled the emergence of AMG510, a selective and well-tolerated inhibitor. Its well-tolerability, excellent pharmacological profile and remarkable ability of KRAS G12C tumor repression in vivo encouraged its further clinical study [ 106 ]. For the initial evaluable nine patients harboring KRAS G12C -mutant cancer treated with AMG510, one patient had a partial response (PR) (NSCLC), six patients had stable disease (SD) (four CRC patients and two NSCLC patients), and two patients had progressive disease (PD) [ 107 ]. The additional follow-up in a larger group of patients (59 NSCLC, 42 CRC, 28 other) also exhibited encouraging results, with a 32.2% (19 patients) objective response rate (ORR) and an 88.1% (52 patients) DCR for NSCLC patients with KRAS G12C mutation and a 7.1% (3 patients) ORR and a 73.8% (31 patients) disease control rate (DCR) for CRC patients [ 15 ]. The promising results in the subgroup of KRAS G12C -mutant NSCLC patients encouraged the multi-center, single-group, open-label, phase 2 trial (CodeBreaK100) of AMG510, administered orally at a dose of 960 mg once daily, in KRAS G12C -mutant advanced NSCLC patients who had previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy or immunotherapy. Among the 124 evaluated patients, there were 46 patients with objective response (37.1%), including in 4 patients (3.2%) with CR and in 42 patients (33.9%) with PR. The DCR was 80.6% in 100 patients. The median duration of response was 11.1 months. The median OS was 12.5 months, and the PFS was 6.8 months. What’s more, the clinical benefit of AMG510 was observed regardless of the mutation status of TP53, STK11 or KEAP1 , PD-L1 expression level and tumor mutational burden [ 108 ]. Based-on the encouraging results of CodeBreaK100 clinical trial, with a 37.1% ORR and 58% of those patients had a duration of response of six months or longer, AMG510 were approved as the first treatment for KRAS G12C mutant NSCLC patients who have received at least one prior systemic therapy. This approval ended the history of undruggable target of RAS in clinic [ 18 ] . The favorable antitumor efficiency of AMG510 promoted its combination with other targeted or cytotoxic agents and its combinations with MEKi, HERi, EGFRi, PI3Ki, AKTi, SHP2i, and PD-1i resulted in enhanced efficiency in vitro and in vivo [ 99 ]. A phase 3 clinical trial compared AMG510 with docetaxel in advanced KRAS G12C mutant NSCLC patients is ongoing ( NCT04303780 , CodeBreaK200). Further, clinical investigation of AMG510 combined with other targeted agents is also under way ( NCT04185883 , CodeBreaK101). Notably, clinical acquired resistance to KRAS G12C inhibition has been observed, the mechanisms lie in multiple genomic or histologic mechanisms, in a study investigating mechanisms of the resistance to MRTX849 (adagrasib) monotherapy, in the 17 patients resistant to adagrasib monotherapy, KRAS alterations included G12D/R/V/W, G13D, Q61H, R68S, H95D/Q/R, Y96C, and high-level amplification of the KRAS(G12C) allele were observed, the bypass mechanisms including mutations in NRAS, BRAF, MAP2K1, and RET, loss-of-function mutations in NF1 and PTEN, fusions in ALK, RET, BRAF, RAF1, and FGFR3, histologic transformation [ 109 ]. The novel KRAS Y96D mutation affecting the switch-II pocket and polyclonal alterations converging on RAS-MAPK reactivation also represents mechanisms underlying clinical required resistance to KRAS G12C inhibitors [ 110 ]. CRC patients possessing KRAS G12C mutation exhibit limited efficiency regarding G12C inhibitors, EGFR signaling was identified as the dominant mechanism of resistance [ 111 ]. Novel strategies should be applied to overcome this drug resistance.

Targeting mutant RAS mRNA

Small interfering RNAs (siRNA) have great clinical potential because of their precise regulation of gene expression. However, the challenge exists in the effective delivery of RNAs to solid tumors. Recently, RNA interference targeting RAS has emerged. Systemic delivery of RAS -targeted RNAs by nanoparticles, nanoliposomes, or exosomes exhibits anti-proliferative effects in cells and in mouse tumor suppression [ 112 – 115 ]. For example, novel hybrid nanoparticles composed of mutant KRAS siRNA, IgG, and poloxamer-188 escaped the clearance of macrophage and delivered the siRNA to cells effectively [ 114 ]. Exosomes are essential mediators of cellular communication and have been explored in drug delivery systems because of their endogenous origin [ 116 ]. Compared with foreign nanoparticles or liposomes, exosomes do not induce an immune response and avoid clearance by macrophages. Recently, exosomes engineered to load siRNA specific to KRAS G12D successfully inhibited tumors in mouse models of pancreatic cancer and prolonged OS, and further study revealed that CD47 on the surface of exosomes protected them from phagocytosis by monocytes. The relatively higher accumulation of exosomes in tumor tissues is generated by the increased micropinocytosis of tumor cells, which indirectly increases the specificity of exosomes [ 115 ]. Chemically modified antisense oligonucleotide (ASO) is also an alternative option for RAS targeting. A 2’-4’ constrained ethyl (cEt)-modified molecule, AZD4785, has good potency with high delivery efficiency and potent KRAS knockdown in tumor tissues. Furthermore, because the distribution of AZD4785 does not need any delivery formulation, immune response or clearance is avoided [ 117 ]. As a genome-editing system, CRISPR/Cas9 has been successfully utilized to target the oncogenic KRAS G12S -mutant allele and induce tumor regression [ 118 ].

In addition to the systemic delivery of siRNA, logical siRNA delivery systems represent a strategy. For example, local drug eluteR (LODER) can shed siRNA to peripheral tumor tissue consistently for more than 70 days. As a result, LODER containing KRAS G12D -targeted siRNA can suppress the proliferation of pancreatic cancer cells and improve the survival of mice [ 119 ]. Another clinical trial also demonstrated siG12D-LODER combination with chemotherapy to be a safe, effective approach for patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer, with a median OS of 15.12 months. Though the number of enrolled patients was limited to only 15, it indicated that siG12D-LODER has clinical potential [ 120 ]. These studies suggest siRNA against mutant RAS mRNA represents a promising approach for RAS-targeting therapy.

Targeting downstream proteins

RAF inhibition

The challenge in developing novel drugs targeting RAS directly encourages a focus on the downstream effectors of RAS-driven cancer. The RAF kinases (ARAF, BRAF, and CRAF) constitute essential components in RAS–RAF–MEK–ERK signaling [ 121 ]. BRAF inhibitors dabrafenib and vemurafenib evoked notable responses and prolonged the survival of patients with BRAF V600E melanoma by disturbing the enhanced MAPK signaling [ 122 ]. However, in KRAS-mutant and RAF wild-type tumors, dabrafenib and vemurafenib activated the MAPK pathway instead of suppressing signaling [ 123 , 124 ]. The underlying mechanism of this paradoxical activation lies in the activation of CRAF; these BRAF inhibitors drive RAS-dependent BRAF binding to CRAF, initiating the downstream signaling driven by CRAF [ 125 ]. Studies implicate that CRAF is vital for mutant KRAS signal transduction and tumor initiation other than BRAF [ 126 ]. Recent research found that CRAF-ablated tumors shrank with evidence of apoptosis, whereas there was no reduction in MAPK signaling in tumor tissues [ 127 ].

Combined inhibition of EGFR and CRAF also effectively suppresses the growth of patient-derived xenograft models with KRAS mutation [ 128 ]. A preclinical study also demonstrated that pan-RAF inhibitors RAF709 or LY3009120 exhibited antitumor activity in vitro and in vivo [ 129 , 130 ]. Recently, a phase I clinical study of lifirafenib (BGB-283), a RAF family kinase inhibitor, showed patients with KRAS-mutated endometrial cancer and NSCLC had a confirmed PR (n = 1 each), while no response was observed in patients with KRAS- or NRAS-mutated colorectal cancer (n = 20) [ 131 ]. This evidence suggests that CRAF is a rational drug target and that pan-RAF inhibitors have the potential for RAS-mutant tumors.

MEK inhibition

The MEK inhibitor trametinib exhibits improved PFS and OS among patients who had metastatic melanoma with BRAF V600E or BRAF V600K mutation [ 132 ], indicating that MEK inhibition may represent an alternative strategy of halting the preternatural MAPK signaling in tumor. Furthermore, regarding NRAS-mutant melanoma patients, MEK inhibitors show activity [ 133 , 134 ]. In a phase II study, six of 30 NRAS-mutant patients showed a PR to MEK162, a small molecule MEK inhibitor [ 133 ], and binimetinib improved the PFS of NRAS-mutant patients compared with dacarbazine (2.8 months vs 1.5 months, P < 0.001) [ 134 ]. However, a series of clinical studies showed no significance for MEK inhibition regarding KRAS-mutant tumors [ 135 – 138 ]. The underlying mechanism of this resistance was considered to be the reactivation of MEK. MEK inhibition is thought to relieve the feedback suppression of upstream signaling. Furthermore, CRAF mediates the reactivation of MAPK signaling [ 139 , 140 ]. Thus, the notion of co-targeting MEK and CRAF or pan-RAF emerged; additionally, the combination strategy exhibited better anti-proliferation of cancer cells harboring KRAS mutations compared with MEK inhibitors alone [ 139 , 140 ]. In a phase II clinical trial, combination of the MEK inhibitor refametinib plus sorafenib, both multiple kinase inhibitors that inhibit CRAF, showed antitumor activity in HCC patients, especially those with KRAS mutations [ 141 ]. The dual MEK/RAF inhibitor RO5126766(VS-6766) exhibited antitumor activity in participants harboring RAS mutations; one patient with an NRAS mutation obtained a PR [ 142 ]. The subsequent evaluation of RO5126766 in solid tumors or multiple myeloma (12 NSCLC, five gynecological malignancy, four colorectal cancer, one melanoma, and seven multiple myeloma) with RAS–RAF–MEK pathway mutations showed that 7 of 26 evaluable patients achieved objective responses [ 143 ]. Remarkedly, the combination of VS-6766 with defactinib obtained 70% ORR (7 of 10 evaluable patients) in LGSOC patients harboring KRAS mutation [ 17 ]. Further clinical studies of VS-6766 for KRAS-mutant NSCLC patients are ongoing ( NCT03681483 and NCT03875820 ).

Because of the absence of paradoxical activation and the resistance to single MEK inhibitors for RAS-mutant tumors, MEK inhibitors are considered candidates for combination in RAS-mutant tumors and have exhibited feasible antitumor activity in vitro and in vivo [ 144 – 150 ]. For example, co-targeting of anti-apoptotic proteins BCL-XL or MCL-1 and MEK promotes tumor regression in KRAS-mutant tumor models compared with MEK targeting alone [ 144 , 145 ]. Serine threonine phosphatase PP2A inhibition could confer MEK inhibitor resistance in KRAS-mutant lung cancer cells [ 148 ]. Moreover, combined insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor (IGF1R) and MEK blockade showed significant effects in KRAS-mutant lung cancer cells and in KRAS-driven mice tumor models [ 146 ]. Combined treatment with poly (adenosine diphosphate–ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors and MEK inhibitors elicited synergistic effects in vitro and in vivo in multiple RAS mutant tumor models [ 150 ]. Remarkably, a phase II study of docetaxel and trametinib (MEK inhibitor) in NSCLC patients with KRAS mutation exhibited a 33% RR and a median survival of 11.1 months [ 151 ]. KRAS mutations may alter the expression of immune inhibitory molecules or immune cell infiltration, which indicates that MAPK signaling may have an impact on immune therapy [ 58 , 59 ]. Combination of MEK inhibition and PD1/PD-L1 blockade prolonged OS of a KRAS-driven lung cancer model [ 152 ]. In addition, combining MEK inhibitors with agonist antibodies targeting the immunostimulatory CD40 receptor resulted in synergistic antitumor efficacy in KRAS-driven tumors [ 153 ].

ERK inhibition

The ERK inhibition strategy exhibits therapeutic potential against RAS-mutant, BRAF-mutant, BRAF- or MEK-inhibitor resistant tumors [ 154 – 156 ]. A novel molecule selectively targeting ERK, SCH772984, induced tumor regression in mouse xenograft models with KRAS or NRAS mutations [ 154 ]. AZD0364 exhibited dose- and time-dependent modulation of ERK1/2-dependent signaling to result in tumor regression in sensitive BRAF-and KRAS-mutant xenografts [ 157 , 158 ]. Another similar small molecule, BVD523 (ulixertinib), exhibited antitumor activity for MEK–BRAF in concurrent or single targeting in resistant models in vitro or in vivo [ 156 ]. A clinical trial assessing BVD523 provided the first clinical evidence that ERK inhibitors were effective for patients with NRAS mutations, in which three of 18 NRAS-mutant patients responded to BVD523 [ 159 ]. As a result, ERK inhibition may represent a potential clinical weapon regarding RAS-mutant tumors [ 160 ].

PI3K–AKT–mTOR inhibition

The PI3K–AKT–mTOR pathway represents another signaling pathway induced by RAS, it may serve as a complementary role for the RAF–MEK–ERK cascade [ 161 ]. As a result, co-targeting of the MAPK and PI3K–AKT–mTOR pathways was developed in preclinical trials. Typically, combination of PI3K and MEK inhibitors displayed synergistic effects in suppressing the proliferation of RAS-mutant cells and regressing xenografted RAS-mutant tumors [ 162 – 167 ]. For example, a dual pan-PI3K and mTOR inhibitor, NVP-BEZ235, was synthetic with MEK inhibitor in repressing KRAS G12D mutant lung cancers [ 163 ]. Combination of MEK and PI3K/mTOR1,2 inhibition could induce apoptosis in NRAS mutant melanoma cancer cells and shrink tumor in mouse xenograft model [ 162 ]. The combination of KRAS G12C inhibitor ARS1620 plus PI3K inhibitors was effective in vitro and in vivo including patient-derived xenografts models for NSCLC models with KRAS G12C mutation [ 165 ].

With the rational combination strategy and validated pre-clinical efficiency. However, in clinical trials, the combination of PI3K and MEK inhibitors exhibited poorly tolerated toxicities or limited efficiency, which limited their utility in the clinic [ 168 – 173 ]. For example, there was no response in 23 RAS-mutant acute myeloid leukemia patients receiving combined MEK and AKT inhibition [ 174 ]. In 57 patients with solid tumors harboring RAS/RAF/PI3K mutations, the combination of GSK2126458, a pan-PI3K/mTOR inhibitor, with MEK inhibitor exhibited limited efficiency. The skin and gastrointestinal toxicities were poorly tolerated [ 168 ]. Similarly, 89 patients with RAS/RAF mutations were enrolled to study the efficiency and safety of MEK inhibitor binimetinib plus PI3K inhibitor buparlisib, only 6 patients achieved partial response and 32/89 patients suspended treatment due to the serious adverse events [ 173 ]. In addition, as a result, further investigations of the proper dosing schedule or more selective inhibitors are needed.

Similarly, mTOR inhibitor or its combination with other targets inhibitors, such as HDAC, BCL-2/BCL-XL, WEE1, KRAS, and MEK, exhibited inhibitory effects for RAS-driven tumors in vitro and in vivo [ 175 – 179 ]. For example, combined mTOR and HDAC inhibitors resulted in tumor regression in a mice xenografts models of KRAS -mutant NSCLC in vivo [ 178 ]. WEE1 and mTOR inhibitor induced efficient apoptosis in KRAS -mutant NSCLC cell lines and suppressed tumor growth in mice model [ 177 ]. A mTOR inhibitor, AZD8055 with a BCL-2 inhibitor exhibited synergistic cytotoxic effects in KRAS -mutant colorectal cancer cells [ 176 ]. However, the mTOR inhibitors exhibited limited efficiency against cancers harboring RAS mutation in clinical trials [ 180 – 185 ]. For instance, the phase II study of evaluating the efficiency of Everolimus, an mTOR inhibitor in metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma previously treated with chemotherapy, among the 100 patients receiving daily everolimus, those with KRAS mutation (41 patients) owned shorter OS (5.59 months vs 7.06 months) and lower DCR (7% vs 14%) compared with those with wild KRAS [ 181 ]. Similarly, in a cohort of cancer patients receiving everolimus, only 1/12 patients with KRAS mutation had disease control, while 15/31 wild cases benefited from the treatment [ 186 ].

Remarkedly, the combination of MEK and AKT inhibitors obtained antitumor ability in certain KRAS- driven human cancers, in a cohort of patients with solid tumors receiving MEK1/2 inhibitor selumetinib and allosteric AKT inhibitors MK-2206, 3 of 13(23%) NSCLC patients and 1 of 2(50%) OVCA patients with KRAS mutation obtained PR, while there was no objective response in colorectal cancers with KRAS mutations [ 167 ]. In RAS- mutant AML, combined MEK and AKT inhibition had no clinical efficiency in 23 patients with RAS mutation [ 174 ]. Further investigations of the combination of MEK and AKT inhibitors in clinic are needed.

Targeting metabolic processes affected by RAS mutations

It is essential for tumors to reprogram the metabolic processes in support of the elevated proliferation state. Oncogenic RAS-driven cancer cells are known to refer to elevated macro-pinocytosis and macro-autophagy. Furthermore, increased glucose metabolism and dependency on glutamine are also hallmarks for RAS-mutant tumors [ 161 ]. In PDAC, autophagy plays a critical role for tumor growth and progression [ 187 , 188 ]. It was found that MAPK signaling and autophagy pathways cooperate to promote RAS-mutant cell survival [ 189 ]. Thus, the autophagy inhibitor chloroquine was combined with the ERK inhibitor SCH772984, resulting in elevated antitumor activity in vitro and in vivo in PDAC [ 190 ]. Furthermore, combined inhibition of MEK plus autophagy showed synergistic antitumor activity against patient-derived xenografts of KRAS-mutant PDAC and NRAS-mutant melanoma [ 191 ]. These data suggest the strategies of combining autophagy blockade and MAPK inhibition may represent new avenues for targeting RAS-mutant tumors.

Other strategies of targeting mutant RAS

PROteolysis TArgeting Chimeras (PROTACs) has emerged a novel and promising strategy to eliminate a protein of interest (POI). Bifunctional molecules combine POI with an E3 ligase, forming a ternary complex, enabling E3 ligase to ubiquitinate the POI and subsequently the POI is recognized and degraded [ 192 , 193 ]. Recently, a bifunctional molecule, LC-2, was reported to covalently binds KRAS G12C with a MRTX849 bridge and recruits E3 ligase. Subsequently, the KRAS G12C protein was ubiquitinated and degraded persistently, the MAPK signaling was suppressed in cancer cells [ 194 ]. Similarly, PROTACs incorporating ARS-1620 and E3 ligase through a thalidomide scaffold could degraded GFP-KRAS G12C in reporter cells [ 195 ]. PROTACs represent a novel direction in small-molecule-mediated targeting and degradation of RAS. However, it depends on the development of bifunctional molecular binding to target protein directly. Therefore, tag-based PROTACs have been developed, which utilizes the CRISPR/Cas-mediated locus-specific knock-in or transgene expression to form the fusion of tag protein and POI, small molecules subsequently induce the degradation of tag fusion protein [ 192 ]. The tag-based PROTACs mainly contain the haloPROTACs system and the dTAG system [ 196 ]. In the haloPROTACs system, the administration of HyT13 successfully degraded haloTag–HRAS G12V fusion protein in NIH-3T3 cells and suppressed the tumor formation in mice [ 197 ]. Similarly, the dTAG system, which relies on the fusion of FKBP12 F36V to the terminus of POI, effectively degraded FKBP12 F36V -tagged KRAS G12V and decreased the downstream signaling in cells [ 198 ]. What’s more, taking advantage of haloPROTACs, a ligand-inducible tractable affinity-directed protein missile system (L-AdPROM), in which aHRAS conjugated to the Halo-tag and tagged with a FLAG reporter, successfully degraded RAS and reduce the RAS-driven signaling in A549 cells [ 199 ]. In addition, PROTACs regarding some targets in RAS signaling pathway, such as MEK, PDEδ, TBK1 and SHP2, also successfully degraded the corresponding targets and suppressed the RAS signaling in vitro or in vivo [ 200 – 203 ].

Mutant RAS may generate abnormal proteins that can evoke the immune response, suggesting the feasibility of immunotherapy utilization in RAS-mutant cancer. One study noted the shrinkage of all lung metastases (seven in total) after the transfer of KRAS G12D -specific CD8 + T cells in a mCRC patient, which indicated immunotherapy may have potential in targeting mutant KRAS [ 204 ]. Several clinical studies are ongoing to evaluate the efficiency and safety of immunotherapy targeting mutant RAS. For example, peripheral blood lymphocytes with modified mTCR that target KRAS G12D and KRAS G12V are under clinic investigation for rectal and pancreatic cancer ( NCT03745326 and NCT03190941 , respectively). In addition, a mRNA-based cancer vaccine (V941) targeting the most commonly occurring KRAS mutations (G12D, G12V, and G12C) is under clinical study ( NCT03948763 ).

Another strategy targeting mutant RAS is screening for synthetic lethal interactors, which aims to identify genes that are vital to RAS-mutant but not wild-type cells. The progress of synthetic lethal interactors for mutant RAS is reviewed elsewhere [ 14 ].

Conclusion

Great progress has been made in the past few years, especially with the approval of Lumakras (sotorasib, AMG510) in treatment of KRAS G12C -mutant NSCLC patients who have received at least one prior systemic therapy, this approval ended the history of no drug in clinic for RAS mutation. However, there are limited patients who can benefit from it, with only about 13% of KRAS G12C mutation in NSCLC patients, CRC patients with KRAS G12C mutation obtained low clinical response [ 18 ]. Thus, further investigation of strategies targeting mutant RAS is necessary. One potential direction is the combination of several inhibitors. These combination strategies are designed to avoid reactivating the MAPK pathway, among which, MEK inhibitors represent the most favorable candidate for combination because of the absence of paradoxical activation and the existence of approved MEK inhibitors. Apart from combining molecules in the MAPK or PI3K–AKT cascades with MEK inhibitors, screening genes that sensitize MEK inhibitors based on short-hairpin RNA or CRISPR may also identify potential combinable candidates [ 145 , 147 , 205 ]. MRTX 849, RMC-4630 and VS-6766 had early encouraging outcomes, demonstrating antitumor activity in patients harboring KRAS mutation (MRTX 849 for KRAS G12C ) [ 16 , 98 , 99 , 143 ]. However, the efficacy and safety still need to be confirmed through large samples and multi-center phase III clinical studies before clinical application. RNA interference represents a promising approach to suppress the expression of mutant RAS, but clinical studies are needed to evaluate their efficiency and safety. The issues of targeting RAS are still ongoing, and we must recognize that a simple therapy will not be effective for all RAS-mutant cancers. Consequently, multiple RAS-targeting strategies are needed for RAS-mutant subsets. Targeting mutant RAS remains a potentially effective treatment in the future.

Abbreviations

Advanced biliary tract cancer

American joint committee on cancer

Acute myeloid leukemia

Advanced pancreatic cancer

Antisense oligonucleotide

Anti-epidermal growth factor receptor

Best supportive care

Capecitabine

Colon cancer

Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia

Carboplatin and paclitaxel

Colorectal cancer

Cytotoxic lymphocyte antigen 4

Disease control rate

Endometrial cancer

Epithelial ovarian cancer

Esophageal carcinoma

5-Fluorouracil, folinic acid, and irinotecan

Oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin

FTase inhibitors

5FU + leucovorin

Gastric cancer

Gemcitabine

Gastrointestinal cancer

Geranylgeranyltransferases

Guanine nucleotide

Hypervariable regions

Immune checkpoint blockade

Fluorouracil [5-FU], leucovorin, and irinotecan

Insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor

Invasive mucinous adenocarcinoma of the lung

KRAS-mutant patients

Wild-type KRAS patients

Locally advanced pancreatic cancer

Include, means including patients with RAS mutation

Local drug eluteR

Lung adenocarcinoma

Metastatic colorectal cancer

Malignant melanoma

Microsatellite instability

Mutation

None

Nanoparticle

Not determined

Neurofibromatosis type 1

Not mentioned

NRAS-mutant patients

Non-small-cell lung carcinoma;

Ovarian epithelial cancer

Overall survival

Ovarian cancer

Oxaliplatin

Pancreatic intra-epithelial neoplasia

Pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm grade-3

Peripheral blood lymphocytes

Pancreatic cancer

Progressive disease

Programmed cell death protein 1

Pancreatic duct adenocarcinoma

Phenyl-binding protein phosphodiesterase δ

Programmed cell death 1 ligand 1

Progesterone receptor

Tyrosine-protein phosphatase non-receptor type 11

Ral guanine exchange factors

Rectal cancer

Recurrence-free survival

RNA interference

Stable disease

Small intestinal adenocarcinoma

SRC homology-2-containing protein tyrosine phosphatase 2

Tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Kun Chen and Yalei Zhang have contributed equally to this work

Acknowledgements

None.

Authors’ contributions

KC and YLZ worked in conceptualization and writing—original manuscript preparation; PW helped in conceptualization, reviewing, and editing. LQ helped in reviewing. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding

This study was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81622049, 81871989), the Shanghai Science and Technology Committee Program (19XD1420900), and Shanghai Education Commission Program (17SG04).

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interest

All authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

1. Parada LF Tabin CJ Shih C Human EJ bladder carcinoma oncogene is homologue of Harvey sarcoma virus ras gene Nature 1982 297 5866 474 478 6283357 10.1038/297474a0

2. Malumbres M Barbacid M RAS oncogenes: the first 30 years Nat Rev Cancer 2003 3 6 459 465 12778136 10.1038/nrc1097

3. Prior IA Hood FE Hartley JL The frequency of ras mutations in cancer Cancer Res 2020 80 14 2969 2974 32209560 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-19-3682 PMC7367715

4. Guerrero S Casanova I Farre L K-ras codon 12 mutation induces higher level of resistance to apoptosis and predisposition to anchorage-independent growth than codon 13 mutation or proto-oncogene overexpression Cancer Res 2000 60 23 6750 6756 11118062

5. Khan AQ Kuttikrishnan S Siveen KS RAS-mediated oncogenic signaling pathways in human malignancies Seminars Cancer Biol 2019 54 1 13 10.1016/j.semcancer.2018.03.001 29524560

6. Jakob JA Bassett RL Jr Ng CS NRAS mutation status is an independent prognostic factor in metastatic melanoma Cancer 2012 118 16 4014 4023 22180178 10.1002/cncr.26724 PMC3310961

7. Foltran L de Maglio G Pella N Prognostic role of KRAS, NRAS, BRAF and PIK3CA mutations in advanced colorectal cancer Future Oncol 2015 11 4 629 640 25686118 10.2217/fon.14.279

8. Devitt B Liu W Salemi R Clinical outcome and pathological features associated with NRAS mutation in cutaneous melanoma Pigment Cell Melanoma Res 2011 24 4 666 672 21615881 10.1111/j.1755-148X.2011.00873.x

9. Ellerhorst JA Greene VR Ekmekcioglu S Clinical correlates of NRAS and BRAF mutations in primary human melanoma Clin Cancer Res 2010 17 2 229 235 20975100 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-2276 PMC3022950

10. Allegra CJ Jessup JM Somerfield MR American Society of Clinical Oncology provisional clinical opinion: testing for KRAS gene mutations in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma to predict response to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody therapy J Clin Oncol 2009 27 12 2091 2096 19188670 10.1200/JCO.2009.21.9170

11. Lievre A Bachet JB Boige V KRAS mutations as an independent prognostic factor in patients with advanced colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab J Clin Oncol 2008 26 3 374 379 18202412 10.1200/JCO.2007.12.5906

12. van Cutsem E Lenz HJ Kohne CH Fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan plus cetuximab treatment and RAS mutations in colorectal cancer J Clin Oncol 2015 33 7 692 700 25605843 10.1200/JCO.2014.59.4812

13. Kurzrock R Ball DW Zahurak ML A phase I trial of the VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor pazopanib in combination with the MEK inhibitor trametinib in advanced solid tumors and differentiated thyroid cancers Clin Cancer Res 2019 25 18 5475 5484 31186313 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-1881 PMC7038784

14. Downward J RAS synthetic lethal screens revisited: still seeking the elusive prize? Clin Cancer Res 2015 21 8 1802 1809 25878361 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-2180 PMC4413026

15. Hong DS Fakih MG Strickler JH KRAS(G12C) inhibition with sotorasib in advanced solid tumors N Engl J Med 2020 383 13 1207 1217 32955176 10.1056/NEJMoa1917239 PMC7571518

16. Sai-Hong I, Ou MK, Susanna V, Ulahannan, et al. The SHP2 inhibitor RMC-4630 in patients with KRAS-mutant non-small cell lung cancer: preliminary evaluation of a first-in-man phase 1 clinical trial. J Thoracic Oncol. 2020;15(2):S15–S16.

17. Verastem Oncology Receives Breakthrough Therapy Designation for VS-6766 with Defactinib in Recurrent Low-Grade Serous Ovarian Cancer | Verastem Inc [EB/OL].[2021-05-24]. https://investor.verastem.com/news-releases/news-release-details/verastem-oncology-receives-breakthrough-therapy-designation-vs .

18. FDA Approves First Targeted Therapy for Lung Cancer Mutation Previously Considered Resistant to Drug Therapy.[EB/OL].[2021-05-28]. https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-targeted-therapy-lung-cancer-mutation-previously-considered-resistant-drug .

19. Ferdinandos Skoulidis BTL, Govindan R, Dy GK, Shapiro G, Bauml J, Schuler MH, Addeo A, Kato T, Besse B, Abrahamanderson AA, Ngarmchamnanrith G, Tran Q, Vamsidharvelcheti. Overall survival and exploratory subgroup analyses from the phase 2 CodeBreaK 100 trial evaluating sotorasib in pretreated KRAS p.G12C mutated non-small cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol. 39, (suppl 15; abstr 9003) (2021).

20. Vetter IR Wittinghofer A The guanine nucleotide-binding switch in three dimensions Science (New York, NY) 2001 294 5545 1299 1304 10.1126/science.1062023 11701921

21. Schopel M Potheraveedu VN Al-Harthy T The small GTPases Ras and Rheb studied by multidimensional NMR spectroscopy: structure and function Biol Chem 2017 398 5–6 577 588 28475102 10.1515/hsz-2016-0276

22. Cherfils J Zeghouf M Regulation of small GTPases by GEFs, GAPs, and GDIs Physiol Rev 2013 93 1 269 309 23303910 10.1152/physrev.00003.2012

23. Roskoski R Jr RAF protein-serine/threonine kinases: structure and regulation Biochem Biophys Res Commun 2010 399 3 313 317 20674547 10.1016/j.bbrc.2010.07.092

24. Krygowska AA, Castellano E. PI3K: a crucial piece in the RAS signaling puzzle. Cold Spring Harbor Perspect Med. 2018;8(6):a031450. 10.1101/cshperspect.a031450 PMC5983164 28847905

25. Hofer F Fields S Schneider C Activated Ras interacts with the Ral guanine nucleotide dissociation stimulator Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1994 91 23 11089 11093 7972015 10.1073/pnas.91.23.11089 PMC45172

26. Pacold ME Suire S Perisic O Crystal structure and functional analysis of Ras binding to its effector phosphoinositide 3-kinase gamma Cell 2000 103 6 931 943 11136978 10.1016/s0092-8674(00)00196-3

27. Fetics SK Guterres H Kearney BM Allosteric effects of the oncogenic RasQ61L mutant on Raf-RBD Structure (London, England: 1993) 2015 23 3 505 516 10.1016/j.str.2014.12.017 PMC7755167 25684575

28. Xu S Long BN Boris GH Structural insight into the rearrangement of the switch I region in GTP-bound G12A K-Ras Acta crystallographica Sect D Struct Biol 2017 73 Pt 12 970 984 10.1107/S2059798317015418 29199977

29. Lu S Banerjee A Jang H GTP binding and oncogenic mutations may attenuate hypervariable region (HVR)-catalytic domain interactions in small GTPase K-Ras4B, exposing the effector binding site J Biol Chem 2015 290 48 28887 28900 26453300 10.1074/jbc.M115.664755 PMC4661403

30. Burd CE Liu W Huynh MV Mutation-specific RAS oncogenicity explains NRAS codon 61 selection in melanoma Cancer Discov 2014 4 12 1418 1429 25252692 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-14-0729 PMC4258185

31. Garcia-Rostan G Zhao H Camp RL ras mutations are associated with aggressive tumor phenotypes and poor prognosis in thyroid cancer J Clin Oncol 2003 21 17 3226 3235 12947056 10.1200/JCO.2003.10.130

32. Guo TA Wu YC Tan C Clinicopathologic features and prognostic value of KRAS, NRAS and BRAF mutations and DNA mismatch repair status: a single-center retrospective study of 1,834 Chinese patients with Stage I-IV colorectal cancer Int J Cancer 2019 145 6 1625 1634 31162857 10.1002/ijc.32489 PMC6771586

33. Yaeger R Cowell E Chou JF RAS mutations affect pattern of metastatic spread and increase propensity for brain metastasis in colorectal cancer Cancer 2015 121 8 1195 1203 25491172 10.1002/cncr.29196 PMC4523078

34. Tie J Lipton L Desai J KRAS mutation is associated with lung metastasis in patients with curatively resected colorectal cancer Clin Cancer Res 2011 17 5 1122 1130 21239505 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-1720

35. Sasaki K Margonis GA Wilson A Prognostic implication of KRAS status after hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases varies according to primary colorectal tumor location Ann Surg Oncol 2016 23 11 3736 3743 27352204 10.1245/s10434-016-5361-6

36. Margonis GA Spolverato G Kim Y Effect of KRAS mutation on long-term outcomes of patients undergoing hepatic resection for colorectal liver metastases Ann Surg Oncol 2015 22 13 4158 4165 26077912 10.1245/s10434-015-4587-z

37. Karagkounis G Torbenson MS Daniel HD Incidence and prognostic impact of KRAS and BRAF mutation in patients undergoing liver surgery for colorectal metastases Cancer 2013 119 23 4137 4144 24104864 10.1002/cncr.28347 PMC3967132

38. Denbo JW Yamashita S Passot G RAS mutation is associated with decreased survival in patients undergoing repeat hepatectomy for colorectal liver metastases J Gastrointest Surg 2017 21 1 68 77 27334313 10.1007/s11605-016-3189-9

39. Thomas NE Edmiston SN Alexander A Association between NRAS and BRAF mutational status and melanoma-specific survival among patients with higher-risk primary melanoma JAMA Oncol 2015 1 3 359 368 26146664 10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.0493 PMC4486299

40. Nodin B Zendehrokh N Sundstrom M Clinicopathological correlates and prognostic significance of KRAS mutation status in a pooled prospective cohort of epithelial ovarian cancer Diagnostic Pathol 2013 8 106 10.1186/1746-1596-8-106 PMC3722044 23800114

41. Douillard JY Oliner KS Siena S Panitumumab-FOLFOX4 treatment and RAS mutations in colorectal cancer N Engl J Med 2013 369 11 1023 1034 24024839 10.1056/NEJMoa1305275

42. Tejpar S Celik I Schlichting M Association of KRAS G13D tumor mutations with outcome in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with first-line chemotherapy with or without cetuximab J Clin Oncol 2012 30 29 3570 3577 22734028 10.1200/JCO.2012.42.2592

43. Tural D Selcukbiricik F Erdamar S Association KRAS G13D tumor mutated outcome in patients with chemotherapy refractory metastatic colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab Hepatogastroenterology 2013 60 125 1035 1040 23537520 10.5754/hge12983

44. Eberhard DA Johnson BE Amler LC Mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor and in KRAS are predictive and prognostic indicators in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer treated with chemotherapy alone and in combination with erlotinib J Clin Oncol 2005 23 25 5900 5909 16043828 10.1200/JCO.2005.02.857

45. Massarelli E Varella-Garcia M Tang X KRAS mutation is an important predictor of resistance to therapy with epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors in non-small-cell lung cancer Clin Cancer Res 2007 13 10 2890 2896 17504988 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-3043

46. Roberts PJ Stinchcombe TE Der CJ Personalized medicine in non-small-cell lung cancer: is KRAS a useful marker in selecting patients for epidermal growth factor receptor-targeted therapy? J Clin Oncol 2010 28 31 4769 4777 20921461 10.1200/JCO.2009.27.4365

47. Zer A Ding K Lee SM Pooled analysis of the prognostic and predictive value of KRAS mutation status and mutation subtype in patients with non-small cell lung cancer treated with epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors J Thorac Oncol 2016 11 3 312 323 26749487 10.1016/j.jtho.2015.11.010

48. Brugger W Triller N Blasinska-Morawiec M Prospective molecular marker analyses of EGFR and KRAS from a randomized, placebo-controlled study of erlotinib maintenance therapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer J Clin Oncol 2011 29 31 4113 4120 21969500 10.1200/JCO.2010.31.8162

49. Mao C Qiu LX Liao RY KRAS mutations and resistance to EGFR-TKIs treatment in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a meta-analysis of 22 studies Lung cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 2010 69 3 272 278 10.1016/j.lungcan.2009.11.020 20022659

50. Taieb J, Zaanan A, Le Malicot K, et al. Prognostic effect of BRAF and KRAS mutations in patients with stage III colon cancer treated with leucovorin, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin with or without cetuximab: a post hoc analysis of the PETACC-8 trial. JAMA Oncol 2016;2(5):643–653. 10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.5225 26768652

51. Yoon HH Tougeron D Shi Q KRAS codon 12 and 13 mutations in relation to disease-free survival in BRAF-wild-type stage III colon cancers from an adjuvant chemotherapy trial (N0147 alliance) Clin Cancer Res 2014 20 11 3033 3043 24687927 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-3140 PMC4040326

52. Roth AD Tejpar S Delorenzi M Prognostic role of KRAS and BRAF in stage II and III resected colon cancer: results of the translational study on the PETACC-3, EORTC 40993, SAKK 60–00 trial J Clin Oncol 2010 28 3 466 474 20008640 10.1200/JCO.2009.23.3452

53. Blons H Emile JF le Malicot K Prognostic value of KRAS mutations in stage III colon cancer: post hoc analysis of the PETACC8 phase III trial dataset Ann Oncol 2014 25 12 2378 2385 25294886 10.1093/annonc/mdu464

54. Lin YL Liang YH Tsai JH Oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy is more beneficial in KRAS mutant than in KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer patients PLoS ONE 2014 9 2 e86789 24505265 10.1371/journal.pone.0086789 PMC3913571

55. Lin YL Liau JY Yu SC Oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy might provide longer progression-free survival in KRAS mutant metastatic colorectal cancer Transl Oncol 2013 6 3 363 369 23730417 10.1593/tlo.13166 PMC3660806

56. Hijioka S Hosoda W Matsuo K Rb loss and KRAS mutation are predictors of the response to platinum-based chemotherapy in pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasm with grade 3: a Japanese Multicenter Pancreatic NEN-G3 Study Clin Cancer Res 2017 23 16 4625 4632 28455360 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-3135

57. Sanmamed MF Chen L A paradigm shift in cancer immunotherapy: from enhancement to normalization Cell 2018 175 2 313 326 30290139 10.1016/j.cell.2018.09.035 PMC6538253

58. Lococo F Torricelli F Rossi G Inter-relationship between PD-L1 expression and clinic-pathological features and driver gene mutations in pulmonary sarcomatoid carcinomas Lung Cancer (Amsterdam, Netherlands) 2017 113 93 101 10.1016/j.lungcan.2017.09.009 29110857

59. Schoenfeld AJ Rizvi H Bandlamudi C Clinical and molecular correlates of PD-L1 expression in patients with lung adenocarcinomas Ann Oncol 2020 31 5 599 608 32178965 10.1016/j.annonc.2020.01.065 PMC7523592

60. Jeanson A, Tomasini P, Souquet-Bressand M, et al. Brief report: efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in KRAS-mutant Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). J Thorac Oncol. 2019;14(6):1095–1101. 10.1016/j.jtho.2019.01.011 30738221

61. Liao W, Overman MJ, Boutin AT, et al. KRAS-IRF2 axis drives immune suppression and immune therapy resistance in colorectal cancer. Cancer Cell. 2019;35(4):559–72.e7. 10.1016/j.ccell.2019.02.008 PMC6467776 30905761

62. Lal N White BS Goussous G KRAS mutation and consensus molecular subtypes 2 and 3 are independently associated with reduced immune infiltration and reactivity in colorectal cancer Clin Cancer Res 2018 24 1 224 233 29061646 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-17-1090 PMC5777581

63. Kerr EM Gaude E Turrell FK Mutant Kras copy number defines metabolic reprogramming and therapeutic susceptibilities Nature 2016 531 7592 110 113 26909577 10.1038/nature16967 PMC4780242

64. Son J Lyssiotis CA Ying H Glutamine supports pancreatic cancer growth through a KRAS-regulated metabolic pathway Nature 2013 496 7443 101 105 23535601 10.1038/nature12040 PMC3656466

65. Macdonald JS McCoy S Whitehead RP A phase II study of farnesyl transferase inhibitor R115777 in pancreatic cancer: a Southwest oncology group (SWOG 9924) study Invest New Drugs 2005 23 5 485 487 16133800 10.1007/s10637-005-2908-y

66. van Cutsem E van de Velde H Karasek P Phase III trial of gemcitabine plus tipifarnib compared with gemcitabine plus placebo in advanced pancreatic cancer J Clin Oncol 2004 22 8 1430 1438 15084616 10.1200/JCO.2004.10.112

67. Yam C Murthy RK Valero V A phase II study of tipifarnib and gemcitabine in metastatic breast cancer Invest New Drugs 2018 36 2 299 306 29374384 10.1007/s10637-018-0564-2

68. Whyte DB Kirschmeier P Hockenberry TN K- and N-Ras are geranylgeranylated in cells treated with farnesyl protein transferase inhibitors J Biol Chem 1997 272 22 14459 14464 9162087 10.1074/jbc.272.22.14459

69. Ho AL, Brana I, Haddad R, et al. Tipifarnib in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma with HRAS mutations. J. Clin. Oncol. 2021;Jco2002903. 10.1200/JCO.20.02903 PMC8189627 33750196

70. Lee HW Sa JK Gualberto A A phase II trial of tipifarnib for patients with previously treated, metastatic urothelial carcinoma harboring HRAS mutations Clin Cancer Res 2020 26 19 5113 5119 32636318 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-20-1246

71. Liu M Sjogren AK Karlsson C Targeting the protein prenyltransferases efficiently reduces tumor development in mice with K-RAS-induced lung cancer Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2010 107 14 6471 6476 20308544 10.1073/pnas.0908396107 PMC2852017

72. Kazi A Xiang S Yang H Dual farnesyl and geranylgeranyl transferase inhibitor thwarts mutant KRAS-driven patient-derived pancreatic tumors Clin Cancer Res 2019 25 19 5984 5996 31227505 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-3399 PMC6774803

73. Lobell RB, Omer CA, Abrams MT, et al. Evaluation of farnesyl:protein transferase and geranylgeranyl:protein transferase inhibitor combinations in preclinical models [J]. Cancer Res. 2001;61(24):8758–68. 11751396

74. Ho CL Wang JL Lee CC Antroquinonol blocks Ras and Rho signaling via the inhibition of protein isoprenyltransferase activity in cancer cells Biomed Pharmacother Biomedecine & pharmacotherapie 2014 68 8 1007 1014 25312820 10.1016/j.biopha.2014.09.008

75. Zimmermann G Papke B Ismail S Small molecule inhibition of the KRAS-PDEdelta interaction impairs oncogenic KRAS signalling Nature 2013 497 7451 638 642 23698361 10.1038/nature12205

76. The KRAS-PDEdelta interaction is a therapeutic target. Cancer Discov 2013;3(7):Of20. 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-RW2013-116 23847364

77. Papke B Murarka S Vogel HA Identification of pyrazolopyridazinones as PDEdelta inhibitors Nat Commun 2016 7 11360 27094677 10.1038/ncomms11360 PMC4843002

78. Frett B Wang Y Li HY Targeting the K-Ras/PDEdelta protein-protein interaction: the solution for Ras-driven cancers or just another therapeutic mirage? ChemMedChem 2013 8 10 1620 1622 23939923 10.1002/cmdc.201300311 PMC4666017

79. Leung EL Luo LX Li Y Identification of a new inhibitor of KRAS-PDEδ interaction targeting KRAS mutant nonsmall cell lung cancer Int J Cancer 2019 145 5 1334 1345 30786019 10.1002/ijc.32222

80. Dance M Montagner A Salles JP The molecular functions of Shp2 in the Ras/Mitogen-activated protein kinase (ERK1/2) pathway Cell Signal 2008 20 3 453 459 17993263 10.1016/j.cellsig.2007.10.002

81. Mainardi S Mulero-Sanchez A Prahallad A SHP2 is required for growth of KRAS-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer in vivo Nat Med 2018 24 7 961 967 29808006 10.1038/s41591-018-0023-9

82. Chen YN Lamarche MJ Chan HM Allosteric inhibition of SHP2 phosphatase inhibits cancers driven by receptor tyrosine kinases Nature 2016 535 7610 148 152 27362227 10.1038/nature18621

83. Wong GS Zhou J Liu JB Targeting wild-type KRAS-amplified gastroesophageal cancer through combined MEK and SHP2 inhibition Nat Med 2018 24 7 968 977 29808010 10.1038/s41591-018-0022-x PMC6039276

84. Fedele C Ran H Diskin B SHP2 Inhibition prevents adaptive resistance to MEK inhibitors in multiple cancer models Cancer Discov 2018 8 10 1237 1249 30045908 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-18-0444 PMC6170706

85. Lu H Liu C Velazquez R SHP2 inhibition overcomes RTK-mediated pathway reactivation in KRAS-mutant tumors treated with MEK inhibitors Mol Cancer Ther 2019 18 7 1323 1334 31068384 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-18-0852

86. Yin C, Zhu B, ZHANG T, et al. Pharmacological Targeting of STK19 Inhibits Oncogenic NRAS-Driven Melanomagenesis [J]. Cell. 2019;176(5):1113–27.e16. 10.1016/j.cell.2019.01.002 30712867

87. Qian L, Chen K, Wang C, et al. Targeting NRAS-Mutant cancers with the selective STK19 kinase inhibitor chelidonine [J]. Clin Cancer Res. 2020;26(13):3408–19. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-19-2604 32156748

88. Maurer T, Garrenton LS, Oh A, et al. Small-molecule ligands bind to a distinct pocket in Ras and inhibit SOS-mediated nucleotide exchange activity. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2012;109(14):5299–304. 10.1073/pnas.1116510109 PMC3325706 22431598

89. Sun Q Burke JP Phan J Discovery of small molecules that bind to K-Ras and inhibit Sos-mediated activation Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2012 51 25 6140 6143 22566140 10.1002/anie.201201358 PMC3620661

91. Hillig RC Sautier B Schroeder J Discovery of potent SOS1 inhibitors that block RAS activation via disruption of the RAS-SOS1 interaction Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2019 116 7 2551 2560 30683722 10.1073/pnas.1812963116 PMC6377443

91. Lito P, Solomon M, Li LS, et al. Allele-specific inhibitors inactivate mutant KRAS G12C by a trapping mechanism. 1095–9203 (Electronic)). 10.1126/science.aad6204 PMC4955282 26841430

92. Patricelli MP Janes MR Li LS Selective inhibition of oncogenic KRAS output with small molecules targeting the inactive state Cancer Discov 2016 6 3 316 329 26739882 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-15-1105

93. Janes MR Zhang J Li LS Targeting KRAS mutant cancers with a covalent G12C-specific inhibitor Cell 2018 172 3 578 89.e17 29373830 10.1016/j.cell.2018.01.006

94. Athuluri-Divakar SK Vasquez-Del-Carpio R Dutta K A small molecule RAS-mimetic disrupts RAS association with effector proteins to block signaling Cell 2016 165 3 643 655 27104980 10.1016/j.cell.2016.03.045 PMC5006944

95. Hansen R Peters U Babbar A The reactivity-driven biochemical mechanism of covalent KRAS(G12C) inhibitors Nat Struct Mol Biol 2018 25 6 454 462 29760531 10.1038/s41594-018-0061-5

96. Gentile DR Rathinaswamy MK Jenkins ML Ras binder induces a modified switch-II pocket in GTP and GDP states Cell Chem Biol 2017 24 12 1455 66.e14 29033317 10.1016/j.chembiol.2017.08.025 PMC5915340

97. Kessler D Gmachl M Mantoulidis A Drugging an undruggable pocket on KRAS Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2019 116 32 15823 15829 31332011 10.1073/pnas.1904529116 PMC6689897

98. Hallin J Engstrom LD Hargis L The KRAS(G12C) inhibitor MRTX849 provides insight toward therapeutic susceptibility of KRAS-mutant cancers in mouse models and patients Cancer Discov 2020 10 1 54 71 31658955 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-19-1167 PMC6954325

99. Canon J Rex K Saiki AY The clinical KRAS(G12C) inhibitor AMG 510 drives anti-tumour immunity Nature 2019 575 7781 217 223 31666701 10.1038/s41586-019-1694-1

100. <MRTX-Corporate-Presentation-Update_6Aug2020_website_PDF.pdf>.

101. Lim SM Westover KD Ficarro SB Therapeutic targeting of oncogenic K-Ras by a covalent catalytic site inhibitor Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2014 53 1 199 204 24259466 10.1002/anie.201307387 PMC3914205

102. Hunter JC Gurbani D Ficarro SB In situ selectivity profiling and crystal structure of SML-8-73-1, an active site inhibitor of oncogenic K-Ras G12C Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2014 111 24 8895 8900 24889603 10.1073/pnas.1404639111 PMC4066474

103. Xu K Park D Magis AT Small molecule KRAS agonist for mutant KRAS cancer therapy Mol Cancer 2019 18 1 85 30971271 10.1186/s12943-019-1012-4 PMC6456974

104. Shima F, Yoshikawa Y, Ye M, Araki M, et al. In silico discovery of small-molecule Ras inhibitors that display antitumor activity by blocking the Ras-effector interaction. 1091–6490 (Electronic)). 10.1073/pnas.1217730110 PMC3657810 23630290

105. Welsch ME Kaplan A Chambers JM Multivalent small-molecule pan-RAS inhibitors Cell 2017 168 5 878 89.e29 28235199 10.1016/j.cell.2017.02.006 PMC5362268

106. Lanman BA Allen JR Allen JG Discovery of a covalent inhibitor of KRAS(G12C) (AMG 510) for the treatment of solid tumors J Med Chem 2020 63 1 52 65 31820981 10.1021/acs.jmedchem.9b01180

107. Fakih M O'Neil B Price TJ Phase 1 study evaluating the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and efficacy of AMG 510, a novel small molecule KRASG12C inhibitor, in advanced solid tumors J Clin Oncol 2019 37 15_suppl 3003

108. Skoulidis F Li BT Dy GK Sotorasib for lung cancers with KRAS p.G12C mutation N Engl J Med 2021 384 25 2371 2381 34096690 10.1056/NEJMoa2103695 PMC9116274

109. Awad MM Liu S Rybkin II Acquired resistance to KRAS(G12C) inhibition in cancer N Engl J Med 2021 384 25 2382 2393 34161704 10.1056/NEJMoa2105281 PMC8864540

110. Tanaka N, Lin JJ, Li C, et al. Clinical acquired resistance to KRASG12C inhibition through a novel KRAS switch-II pocket mutation and polyclonal alterations converging on RAS-MAPK reactivation. Cancer Discov. 2021;11:1–10. 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-21-0365 PMC8338755 33824136

111. Amodio V, Yaeger R, Arcella P, et al. EGFR Blockade Reverts Resistance to KRAS(G12C) Inhibition in Colorectal Cancer [J]. Cancer Discov. 2020;10(8):1129–39. 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-20-0187 PMC7416460 32430388

112. Xue W, Dahlman JE, Tammela T, et al. Small RNA combination therapy for lung cancer. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2014;111(34):E3553–61. 10.1073/pnas.1412686111 PMC4151750 25114235

113. Pecot CV Wu SY Bellister S Therapeutic silencing of KRAS using systemically delivered siRNAs Mol Cancer Ther 2014 13 12 2876 2885 25281617 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-14-0074 PMC4416486

114. Lakshmikuttyamma A Sun Y Lu B Stable and efficient transfection of siRNA for mutated KRAS silencing using novel hybrid nanoparticles Mol Pharm 2014 11 12 4415 4424 25340957 10.1021/mp500525p

115. Kamerkar S Lebleu VS Sugimoto H Exosomes facilitate therapeutic targeting of oncogenic KRAS in pancreatic cancer Nature 2017 546 7659 498 503 28607485 10.1038/nature22341 PMC5538883

116. Johnsen KB Gudbergsson JM Skov MN A comprehensive overview of exosomes as drug delivery vehicles—endogenous nanocarriers for targeted cancer therapy Biochem Biophys Acta 2014 1846 1 75 87 24747178 10.1016/j.bbcan.2014.04.005

117. Ross SJ, Revenko AS, Hanson LL, et al. Targeting KRAS-dependent tumors with AZD4785, a high-affinity therapeutic antisense oligonucleotide inhibitor of KRAS. Sci Transl Med. 2017;9(394):eaal5253. 10.1126/scitranslmed.aal5253 28615361

118. Gao Q, Ouyang W, Kang B, et al. Selective targeting of the oncogenic KRAS G12S mutant allele by CRISPR/Cas9 induces efficient tumor regression. Theranostics. 2020;10(11):5137–53. 10.7150/thno.42325 PMC7163449 32308773

119. Zorde Khvalevsky E Gabai R Rachmut IH Mutant KRAS is a druggable target for pancreatic cancer Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2013 110 51 20723 20728 24297898 10.1073/pnas.1314307110 PMC3870687

120. Golan T Khvalevsky EZ Hubert A RNAi therapy targeting KRAS in combination with chemotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients Oncotarget 2015 6 27 24560 24570 26009994 10.18632/oncotarget.4183 PMC4695206

121. Karoulia Z Gavathiotis E Poulikakos PI New perspectives for targeting RAF kinase in human cancer Nat Rev Cancer 2017 17 11 676 691 28984291 10.1038/nrc.2017.79 PMC6000833

122. Chapman PB Hauschild A Robert C Improved survival with vemurafenib in melanoma with BRAF V600E mutation N Engl J Med 2011 364 26 2507 2516 21639808 10.1056/NEJMoa1103782 PMC3549296

123. Hatzivassiliou G Song K Yen I RAF inhibitors prime wild-type RAF to activate the MAPK pathway and enhance growth Nature 2010 464 7287 431 435 20130576 10.1038/nature08833

124. Poulikakos PI Zhang C Bollag G RAF inhibitors transactivate RAF dimers and ERK signalling in cells with wild-type BRAF Nature 2010 464 7287 427 430 20179705 10.1038/nature08902 PMC3178447

125. Heidorn SJ Milagre C Whittaker S Kinase-dead BRAF and oncogenic RAS cooperate to drive tumor progression through CRAF Cell 2010 140 2 209 221 20141835 10.1016/j.cell.2009.12.040 PMC2872605

126. McCormick F c-Raf in KRas mutant cancers: a moving target Cancer Cell 2018 33 2 158 159 29438690 10.1016/j.ccell.2018.01.017 PMC6464632

127. Sanclemente M Francoz S Esteban-Burgos L c-RAF ablation induces regression of advanced Kras/Trp53 mutant lung adenocarcinomas by a mechanism independent of MAPK signaling Cancer Cell 2018 33 2 217 28.e4 29395869 10.1016/j.ccell.2017.12.014

128. Blasco MT, Navas C, Martín-Serrano G, et al. Complete regression of advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas upon combined inhibition of EGFR and C-RAF. Cancer Cell. 2019;35(4):573–87.e6. 10.1016/j.ccell.2019.03.002 PMC10132447 30975481

129. Peng SB Henry JR Kaufman MD Inhibition of RAF isoforms and active dimers by LY3009120 leads to anti-tumor activities in RAS or BRAF mutant cancers Cancer Cell 2015 28 3 384 398 26343583 10.1016/j.ccell.2015.08.002

130. Shao W Mishina YM Feng Y Antitumor properties of RAF709, a highly selective and potent inhibitor of RAF kinase dimers, in tumors driven by mutant RAS or BRAF Cancer Res 2018 78 6 1537 1548 29343524 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-17-2033

131. Desai J, Gan H, Barrow C, et al. Phase I, open-label, dose-escalation/dose-expansion study of lifirafenib (BGB-283), an RAF family kinase inhibitor, in patients with solid tumors. J. Clin. Oncol. 2020;Jco1902654. 10.1200/JCO.19.02654 PMC7325368 32182156

132. Flaherty KT Robert C Hersey P Improved survival with MEK inhibition in BRAF-mutated melanoma N Engl J Med 2012 367 2 107 114 22663011 10.1056/NEJMoa1203421

133. Ascierto PA Schadendorf D Berking C MEK162 for patients with advanced melanoma harbouring NRAS or Val600 BRAF mutations: a non-randomised, open-label phase 2 study Lancet Oncol 2013 14 3 249 256 23414587 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70024-X

134. Dummer R Schadendorf D Ascierto PA Binimetinib versus dacarbazine in patients with advanced NRAS -mutant melanoma (NEMO): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial Lancet Oncol 2017 18 4 435 445 28284557 10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30180-8

135. Janne PA van den Heuvel MM Barlesi F Selumetinib plus docetaxel compared with docetaxel alone and progression-free survival in patients with KRAS-mutant advanced non-small cell lung cancer: the SELECT-1 randomized clinical trial JAMA 2017 317 18 1844 1853 28492898 10.1001/jama.2017.3438 PMC5815037

136. Adjei AA Cohen RB Franklin W Phase I pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic study of the oral, small-molecule mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase 1/2 inhibitor AZD6244 (ARRY-142886) in patients with advanced cancers J Clin Oncol 2008 26 13 2139 2146 18390968 10.1200/JCO.2007.14.4956 PMC2718422

137. Blumenschein GR Jr Smit EF Planchard D A randomized phase II study of the MEK1/MEK2 inhibitor trametinib (GSK1120212) compared with docetaxel in KRAS-mutant advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)dagger Ann Oncol 2015 26 5 894 901 25722381 10.1093/annonc/mdv072 PMC4855243

138. Infante JR Somer BG Park JO A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of trametinib, an oral MEK inhibitor, in combination with gemcitabine for patients with untreated metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas Eur J Cancer 2014 50 12 2072 2081 24915778 10.1016/j.ejca.2014.04.024

139. Lito P Saborowski A Yue J Disruption of CRAF-mediated MEK activation is required for effective MEK inhibition in KRAS mutant tumors Cancer Cell 2014 25 5 697 710 24746704 10.1016/j.ccr.2014.03.011 PMC4049532

140. Yen I Shanahan F Merchant M Pharmacological induction of RAS-GTP confers RAF inhibitor sensitivity in KRAS mutant tumors Cancer Cell 2018 34 4 611 25.e7 30300582 10.1016/j.ccell.2018.09.002

141. Lim HY Heo J Choi HJ A phase II study of the efficacy and safety of the combination therapy of the MEK inhibitor refametinib (BAY 86–9766) plus sorafenib for Asian patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma Clin Cancer Res 2014 20 23 5976 5985 25294897 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-3445

142. Martinez-Garcia M Banerji U Albanell J First-in-human, phase I dose-escalation study of the safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of RO5126766, a first-in-class dual MEK/RAF inhibitor in patients with solid tumors Clin Cancer Res 2012 18 17 4806 4819 22761467 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-12-0742

143. Guo C Chénard-Poirier M Roda D Intermittent schedules of the oral RAF-MEK inhibitor CH5126766/VS-6766 in patients with RAS/RAF-mutant solid tumours and multiple myeloma: a single-centre, open-label, phase 1 dose-escalation and basket dose-expansion study Lancet Oncol 2020 21 11 1478 1488 33128873 10.1016/S1470-2045(20)30464-2

144. Nangia V Siddiqui FM Caenepeel S Exploiting MCL1 dependency with combination MEK + MCL1 inhibitors leads to induction of apoptosis and tumor regression in KRAS-mutant non-small cell lung cancer Cancer Discov 2018 8 12 1598 1613 30254092 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-18-0277 PMC6279543

145. Corcoran RB Cheng KA Hata AN Synthetic lethal interaction of combined BCL-XL and MEK inhibition promotes tumor regressions in KRAS mutant cancer models Cancer Cell 2013 23 1 121 128 23245996 10.1016/j.ccr.2012.11.007 PMC3667614

146. Chen R Sweet-Cordero EA Two is better than one: combining IGF1R and MEK blockade as a promising novel treatment strategy against KRAS-mutant lung cancer Cancer Discov 2013 3 5 491 493 23658296 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-13-0128 PMC6138247

147. Dompe N Klijn C Watson SA A CRISPR screen identifies MAPK7 as a target for combination with MEK inhibition in KRAS mutant NSCLC PLoS ONE 2018 13 6 e0199264 29912950 10.1371/journal.pone.0199264 PMC6005515

148. Kauko O, O'Connor CM, Kulesskiy E, et al. PP2A inhibition is a druggable MEK inhibitor resistance mechanism in KRAS-mutant lung cancer cells. Sci Transl Med. 2018;10(450):eaaq1093. 10.1126/scitranslmed.aaq1093 PMC8335581 30021885

149. Pek M, Yatim S, Chen Y, et al. Oncogenic KRAS-associated gene signature defines co-targeting of CDK4/6 and MEK as a viable therapeutic strategy in colorectal cancer. Oncogene. 2017;36(35):4975–86. 10.1038/onc.2017.120 28459468

150. Sun C, Fang Y, Yin J, et al. Rational combination therapy with PARP and MEK inhibitors capitalizes on therapeutic liabilities in RAS mutant cancers. Sci Transl Med. 2017;9(392):eaal5148. 10.1126/scitranslmed.aal5148 PMC5919217 28566428

151. Gadgeel SM, Miao J, Riess JW, et al. S1507: phase II study of docetaxel and trametinib in patients with G12C or non-G12C KRAS mutation positive (+) recurrent non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). 2019;37(15_suppl):9021. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-22-3947 PMC10526968 37233987

152. Lee JW Zhang Y Eoh KJ The combination of MEK inhibitor with immunomodulatory antibodies targeting programmed death 1 and programmed death ligand 1 results in prolonged survival in Kras/p53-driven lung cancer J Thorac Oncol 2019 14 6 1046 1060 30771521 10.1016/j.jtho.2019.02.004 PMC6542636

153. Baumann D Hägele T Mochayedi J Proimmunogenic impact of MEK inhibition synergizes with agonist anti-CD40 immunostimulatory antibodies in tumor therapy Nat Commun 2020 11 1 2176 32358491 10.1038/s41467-020-15979-2 PMC7195409

154. Morris EJ Jha S Restaino CR Discovery of a novel ERK inhibitor with activity in models of acquired resistance to BRAF and MEK inhibitors Cancer Discov 2013 3 7 742 750 23614898 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-13-0070

155. Lim J Kelley EH Methot JL Discovery of 1-(1H-pyrazolo[4,3-c]pyridin-6-yl)urea inhibitors of extracellular signal-regulated kinase (ERK) for the treatment of cancers J Med Chem 2016 59 13 6501 6511 27329786 10.1021/acs.jmedchem.6b00708

156. Germann UA Furey BF Markland W Targeting the MAPK signaling pathway in cancer: promising preclinical activity with the novel selective ERK1/2 inhibitor BVD-523 (Ulixertinib) Mol Cancer Ther 2017 16 11 2351 2363 28939558 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-17-0456

157. Flemington V Davies EJ Robinson D AZD0364 is a potent and selective ERK1/2 inhibitor that enhances antitumor activity in KRAS-mutant tumor models when combined with the MEK inhibitor Selumetinib Molecular cancer therapeutics 2021 20 2 238 249 33273059 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-20-0002

158. Ward RA Anderton MJ Bethel P Discovery of a potent and selective oral inhibitor of ERK1/2 (AZD0364) that is efficacious in both monotherapy and combination therapy in models of nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC) J Med Chem 2019 62 24 11004 11018 31710489 10.1021/acs.jmedchem.9b01295

159. Sullivan RJ Infante JR Janku F First-in-class ERK1/2 inhibitor ulixertinib (BVD-523) in patients with mapk mutant advanced solid tumors: results of a phase I dose-escalation and expansion study Cancer Discov 2018 8 2 184 195 29247021 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-17-1119

160. Smalley I Smalley KSM ERK inhibition: a new front in the war against MAPK pathway-driven cancers? Cancer Discov 2018 8 2 140 142 29431672 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-17-1355

161. Papke B Der CJ Drugging RAS: know the enemy Science (New York, NY) 2017 355 6330 1158 1163 10.1126/science.aam7622 28302824

162. Posch C Moslehi H Feeney L Combined targeting of MEK and PI3K/mTOR effector pathways is necessary to effectively inhibit NRAS mutant melanoma in vitro and in vivo Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2013 110 10 4015 4020 23431193 10.1073/pnas.1216013110 PMC3593920

163. Engelman JA Chen L Tan X Effective use of PI3K and MEK inhibitors to treat mutant Kras G12D and PIK3CA H1047R murine lung cancers Nat Med 2008 14 12 1351 1356 19029981 10.1038/nm.1890 PMC2683415

164. Renshaw J Taylor KR Bishop R Dual blockade of the PI3K/AKT/mTOR (AZD8055) and RAS/MEK/ERK (AZD6244) pathways synergistically inhibits rhabdomyosarcoma cell growth in vitro and in vivo Clin Cancer Res 2013 19 21 5940 5951 23918606 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-0850 PMC3818134

165. Misale S Fatherree JP Cortez E KRAS G12C NSCLC models are sensitive to direct targeting of KRAS in combination with PI3K inhibition Clin Cancer Res 2019 25 2 796 807 30327306 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-0368

166. Jin N Jiang T Rosen DM Synergistic action of a RAF inhibitor and a dual PI3K/mTOR inhibitor in thyroid cancer Clin Cancer Res 2011 17 20 6482 6489 21831957 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-0933 PMC4828042

167. Tolcher AW Khan K Ong M Antitumor activity in RAS-driven tumors by blocking AKT and MEK Clin Cancer Res 2015 21 4 739 748 25516890 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-1901 PMC4335074

168. Grilley-Olson JE Bedard PL Fasolo A A phase Ib dose-escalation study of the MEK inhibitor trametinib in combination with the PI3K/mTOR inhibitor GSK2126458 in patients with advanced solid tumors Invest New Drugs 2016 34 6 740 749 27450049 10.1007/s10637-016-0377-0 PMC7574157

169. Bedard PL Tabernero J Janku F A phase Ib dose-escalation study of the oral pan-PI3K inhibitor buparlisib (BKM120) in combination with the oral MEK1/2 inhibitor trametinib (GSK1120212) in patients with selected advanced solid tumors Clin Cancer Res 2015 21 4 730 738 25500057 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-1814

170. Tolcher AW Patnaik A Papadopoulos KP Phase I study of the MEK inhibitor trametinib in combination with the AKT inhibitor afuresertib in patients with solid tumors and multiple myeloma Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2015 75 1 183 189 25417902 10.1007/s00280-014-2615-5

171. Shapiro GI Lorusso P Kwak E Phase Ib study of the MEK inhibitor cobimetinib (GDC-0973) in combination with the PI3K inhibitor pictilisib (GDC-0941) in patients with advanced solid tumors Invest New Drugs 2020 38 2 419 432 31020608 10.1007/s10637-019-00776-6

172. Liu JF Gray KP Wright AA Results from a single arm, single stage phase II trial of trametinib and GSK2141795 in persistent or recurrent cervical cancer Gynecol Oncol 2019 154 1 95 101 31118140 10.1016/j.ygyno.2019.05.003

173. Bardia A Gounder M Rodon J Phase Ib study of combination therapy with MEK inhibitor Binimetinib and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase inhibitor Buparlisib in patients with advanced solid tumors with RAS/RAF alterations Oncologist 2020 25 1 e160 e169 31395751 10.1634/theoncologist.2019-0297 PMC6964137

174. Ragon BK Odenike O Baer MR Oral MEK 1/2 inhibitor trametinib in combination with AKT inhibitor GSK2141795 in patients with acute myeloid leukemia with RAS mutations: a phase II study Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk 2019 19 7 431 40.e13 31056348 10.1016/j.clml.2019.03.015 PMC6626580

175. Broutin S Stewart A Thavasu P Insights into significance of combined inhibition of MEK and m-TOR signalling output in KRAS mutant non-small-cell lung cancer Br J Cancer 2016 115 5 549 552 27441499 10.1038/bjc.2016.220 PMC4997545

176. Faber AC Coffee EM Costa C mTOR inhibition specifically sensitizes colorectal cancers with KRAS or BRAF mutations to BCL-2/BCL-XL inhibition by suppressing MCL-1 Cancer Discov 2014 4 1 42 52 24163374 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-13-0315 PMC3973435

177. Hai J Liu S Bufe L Synergy of WEE1 and mTOR inhibition in mutant KRAS-driven lung cancers Clin Cancer Res 2017 23 22 6993 7005 28821559 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-17-1098 PMC5690829

178. Malone CF Emerson C Ingraham R mTOR and HDAC inhibitors converge on the TXNIP/thioredoxin pathway to cause catastrophic oxidative stress and regression of RAS-driven tumors Cancer Discov 2017 7 12 1450 1463 28963352 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-17-0177 PMC5718976

179. Molina-Arcas M, Moore C, Rana S, et al. Development of combination therapies to maximize the impact of KRAS-G12C inhibitors in lung cancer. Sci Transl Med. 2019;11(510):eaaw7999. 10.1126/scitranslmed.aaw7999 PMC6764843 31534020

180. Mohseni M, Park BH. PIK3CA and KRAS mutations predict for response to everolimus therapy: now that’s RAD001. J Clin Investig. 2010;120(8):2655–8. 10.1172/JCI44026 PMC2912204 20664174

181. Ng K Tabernero J Hwang J Phase II study of everolimus in patients with metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma previously treated with bevacizumab-, fluoropyrimidine-, oxaliplatin-, and irinotecan-based regimens Clin Cancer Res 2013 19 14 3987 3995 23743569 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-0027 PMC3725595

182. Nogova L Mattonet C Scheffler M Sorafenib and everolimus in patients with advanced solid tumors and KRAS-mutated NSCLC: A phase I trial with early pharmacodynamic FDG-PET assessment Cancer Med 2020 9 14 4991 5007 32436621 10.1002/cam4.3131 PMC7367645

183. Spindler KL Sorensen MM Pallisgaard N Phase II trial of temsirolimus alone and in combination with irinotecan for KRAS mutant metastatic colorectal cancer: outcome and results of KRAS mutational analysis in plasma Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) 2013 52 5 963 970 10.3109/0284186X.2013.776175 23514584

184. Trédan O Treilleux I Wang Q Predicting everolimus treatment efficacy in patients with advanced endometrial carcinoma: a GINECO group study Targeted Oncol 2013 8 4 243 251 10.1007/s11523-012-0242-9 23238879

185. Wolpin BM Hezel AF Abrams T Oral mTOR inhibitor everolimus in patients with gemcitabine-refractory metastatic pancreatic cancer J Clin Oncol 2009 27 2 193 198 19047305 10.1200/JCO.2008.18.9514 PMC2645085

186. di Nicolantonio F Arena S Tabernero J Deregulation of the PI3K and KRAS signaling pathways in human cancer cells determines their response to everolimus J Clin Investig 2010 120 8 2858 2866 20664172 10.1172/JCI37539 PMC2912177

187. Yang A Rajeshkumar NV Wang X Autophagy is critical for pancreatic tumor growth and progression in tumors with p53 alterations Cancer Discov 2014 4 8 905 913 24875860 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-14-0362 PMC4125497

188. Yang S Wang X Contino G Pancreatic cancers require autophagy for tumor growth Genes Dev 2011 25 7 717 729 21406549 10.1101/gad.2016111 PMC3070934

189. Lee CS Lee LC Yuan TL MAP kinase and autophagy pathways cooperate to maintain RAS mutant cancer cell survival Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 2019 116 10 4508 4517 30709910 10.1073/pnas.1817494116 PMC6410784

190. Bryant KL Stalnecker CA Zeitouni D Combination of ERK and autophagy inhibition as a treatment approach for pancreatic cancer Nat Med 2019 25 4 628 640 30833752 10.1038/s41591-019-0368-8 PMC6484853

191. Kinsey CG Camolotto SA Boespflug AM Protective autophagy elicited by RAF–>MEK–>ERK inhibition suggests a treatment strategy for RAS-driven cancers Nat Med 2019 25 4 620 627 30833748 10.1038/s41591-019-0367-9 PMC6452642

192. Burslem GM Crews CM Proteolysis-targeting chimeras as therapeutics and tools for biological discovery Cell 2020 181 1 102 114 31955850 10.1016/j.cell.2019.11.031 PMC7319047

193. Sakamoto KM Kim KB Kumagai A Protacs: chimeric molecules that target proteins to the Skp1-Cullin-F box complex for ubiquitination and degradation Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2001 98 15 8554 8559 11438690 10.1073/pnas.141230798 PMC37474

194. Bond MJ Chu L Nalawansha DA Targeted degradation of oncogenic KRAS(G12C) by VHL-recruiting PROTACs ACS Cent Sci 2020 6 8 1367 1375 32875077 10.1021/acscentsci.0c00411 PMC7453568

195. Zeng M Xiong Y Safaee N Exploring targeted degradation strategy for oncogenic KRAS(G12C) Cell Chem Biol 2020 27 1 19 31.e6 31883964 10.1016/j.chembiol.2019.12.006

196. Luh LM Scheib U Juenemann K Prey for the proteasome: targeted protein degradation-a medicinal chemist's perspective Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2020 59 36 15448 15466 32428344 10.1002/anie.202004310 PMC7496094

197. Neklesa TK Tae HS Schneekloth AR Small-molecule hydrophobic tagging-induced degradation of HaloTag fusion proteins Nat Chem Biol 2011 7 8 538 543 21725302 10.1038/nchembio.597 PMC3139752

198. Nabet B Roberts JM Buckley DL The dTAG system for immediate and target-specific protein degradation Nat Chem Biol 2018 14 5 431 441 29581585 10.1038/s41589-018-0021-8 PMC6295913

199. Simpson LM Macartney TJ Nardin A Inducible degradation of target proteins through a tractable affinity-directed protein missile system Cell Chem Biol 2020 27 9 1164 80.e5 32668203 10.1016/j.chembiol.2020.06.013 PMC7505680

200. Cheng J Li Y Wang X Discovery of novel PDEδ degraders for the treatment of KRAS mutant colorectal cancer J Med Chem 2020 63 14 7892 7905 32603594 10.1021/acs.jmedchem.0c00929

201. Crew AP Raina K Dong H Identification and Characterization of Von Hippel-Lindau-recruiting proteolysis targeting chimeras (PROTACs) of TANK-binding kinase 1 J Med Chem 2018 61 2 583 598 28692295 10.1021/acs.jmedchem.7b00635

202. Vollmer S Cunoosamy D Lv H Design, Synthesis, and Biological Evaluation of MEK PROTACs J Med Chem 2020 63 1 157 162 31804822 10.1021/acs.jmedchem.9b00810

203. Yang X Wang Z Pei Y Discovery of thalidomide-based PROTAC small molecules as the highly efficient SHP2 degraders Eur J Med Chem 2021 218 113341 33780898 10.1016/j.ejmech.2021.113341

204. Tran E Robbins PF Lu YC T-cell transfer therapy targeting mutant KRAS in cancer N Engl J Med 2016 375 23 2255 2262 27959684 10.1056/NEJMoa1609279 PMC5178827

205. Manchado E Weissmueller S Morris JPT A combinatorial strategy for treating KRAS-mutant lung cancer Nature 2016 534 7609 647 651 27338794 10.1038/nature18600 PMC4939262

206. Morris VK Lucas FA Overman MJ Clinicopathologic characteristics and gene expression analyses of non-KRAS 12/13, RAS-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer Ann Oncol 2014 25 10 2008 2014 25009008 10.1093/annonc/mdu252 PMC4176451

207. Einspahr JG Martinez ME Jiang R Associations of Ki-ras proto-oncogene mutation and p53 gene overexpression in sporadic colorectal adenomas with demographic and clinicopathologic characteristics Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev 2006 15 8 1443 1450 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-06-0144 PMC3547362 16896030

208. Lee B Lee T Lee SH Clinicopathologic characteristics of EGFR, KRAS, and ALK alterations in 6,595 lung cancers Oncotarget 2016 7 17 23874 23884 26992209 10.18632/oncotarget.8074 PMC5029670

209. Ichinokawa H Ishii G Nagai K Distinct clinicopathologic characteristics of lung mucinous adenocarcinoma with KRAS mutation Hum Pathol 2013 44 12 2636 2642 24119562 10.1016/j.humpath.2013.05.026

210. Jun SY Kim M Gu MJ Clinicopathologic and prognostic associations of KRAS and BRAF mutations in small intestinal adenocarcinoma Mod Pathol 2016 29 4 402 415 26892442 10.1038/modpathol.2016.40

211. Karapetis CS Khambata-Ford S Jonker DJ K-ras mutations and benefit from cetuximab in advanced colorectal cancer N Engl J Med 2008 359 17 1757 1765 18946061 10.1056/NEJMoa0804385

212. Amado RG Wolf M Peeters M Wild-type KRAS is required for panitumumab efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer J Clin Oncol 2008 26 10 1626 1634 18316791 10.1200/JCO.2007.14.7116

213. Bokemeyer C Bondarenko I Makhson A Fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin with and without cetuximab in the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer J Clin Oncol 2009 27 5 663 671 19114683 10.1200/JCO.2008.20.8397

214. van Cutsem E Kohne CH Lang I Cetuximab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: updated analysis of overall survival according to tumor KRAS and BRAF mutation status J Clin Oncol 2011 29 15 2011 2019 21502544 10.1200/JCO.2010.33.5091

215. Peeters M Price TJ Cervantes A Randomized phase III study of panitumumab with fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) compared with FOLFIRI alone as second-line treatment in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer J Clin Oncol 2010 28 31 4706 4713 20921462 10.1200/JCO.2009.27.6055

216. Price TJ Hardingham JE Lee CK Impact of KRAS and BRAF gene mutation status on outcomes from the phase III AGITG MAX trial of capecitabine alone or in combination with bevacizumab and mitomycin in advanced colorectal cancer J Clin Oncol 2011 29 19 2675 2682 21646616 10.1200/JCO.2010.34.5520

217. Ellis PM Shepherd FA Millward M Dacomitinib compared with placebo in pretreated patients with advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NCIC CTG BR.26): a double-blind, randomised, phase 3 trial Lancet Oncol 2014 15 12 1379 1388 25439692 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70472-3

218. Garassino MC Martelli O Broggini M Erlotinib versus docetaxel as second-line treatment of patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer and wild-type EGFR tumours (TAILOR): a randomised controlled trial Lancet Oncol 2013 14 10 981 988 23883922 10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70310-3

219. Rulli E Marabese M Torri V Value of KRAS as prognostic or predictive marker in NSCLC: results from the TAILOR trial Ann Oncol 2015 26 10 2079 2084 26209642 10.1093/annonc/mdv318

220. Schneider CP Heigener D Schott-Von-romer K Epidermal growth factor receptor-related tumor markers and clinical outcomes with erlotinib in non-small cell lung cancer: an analysis of patients from german centers in the TRUST study J Thorac Oncol 2008 3 12 1446 1453 19057271 10.1097/JTO.0b013e31818ddcaa

221. Da Cunha Santos G Dhani N Tu D Molecular predictors of outcome in a phase 3 study of gemcitabine and erlotinib therapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group Study PA3 Cancer 2010 116 24 5599 5607 20824720 10.1002/cncr.25393

222. Moore MJ Goldstein D Hamm J Erlotinib plus gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a phase III trial of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group J Clin Oncol 2007 25 15 1960 1966 17452677 10.1200/JCO.2006.07.9525

223. Heinemann V Vehling-Kaiser U Waldschmidt D Gemcitabine plus erlotinib followed by capecitabine versus capecitabine plus erlotinib followed by gemcitabine in advanced pancreatic cancer: final results of a randomised phase 3 trial of the 'Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische Onkologie' (AIO-PK0104) Gut 2013 62 5 751 759 22773551 10.1136/gutjnl-2012-302759 PMC6309814

224. Chen JS Hsu C Chiang NJ A KRAS mutation status-stratified randomized phase II trial of gemcitabine and oxaliplatin alone or in combination with cetuximab in advanced biliary tract cancer Ann Oncol 2015 26 5 943 949 25632066 10.1093/annonc/mdv035

225. Ogino S Meyerhardt JA Irahara N KRAS mutation in stage III colon cancer and clinical outcome following intergroup trial CALGB 89803 Clin Cancer Res 2009 15 23 7322 7329 19934290 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-09-1570 PMC2787689

226. Hofmann MH, Gmachl M, Ramharter J, et al. BI-3406, a potent and selective sos1-kras interaction inhibitor, is effective in KRAS-Driven cancers through combined mek inhibition [J]. Cancer Discov. 2021;11(1):142–57. 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-20-0142 PMC7892644 32816843

227. Peng SB, Si C, Zhang Y, et al. Preclinical characterization of LY3537982, a novel, highly selective and potent KRAS-G12C inhibitor. AACR Annual Meeting. 2021;1259.

228. Martin-Gago P Fansa EK Klein CH A PDE6delta-KRas inhibitor chemotype with up to seven H-bonds and picomolar affinity that prevents efficient inhibitor release by Arl2 Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2017 56 9 2423 2428 28106325 10.1002/anie.201610957