Why this matters for Axiomera

Drug-resistance biology is a harmonization problem before it is a therapeutics problem

This study reads resistance from four data layers at once — single-cell chromatin accessibility, transcriptomics, proteomics, and metabolic flux — and only becomes interpretable when those layers are bound to shared biological entities and aligned across timepoints and models. That alignment is the core work Axiomera is built for: resolving multi-omics and clinical signals to common ontologies so that a chromatin peak, a gene, a protein, and a metabolite can be reasoned about as one coordinated program rather than four disconnected assays.

The Epigenetic Resistance Index is a concrete example of the kind of asset Axiomera supports downstream. A biomarker built from regulatory-state features is only as good as the consistency of the data feeding it; keeping features comparable across cohorts, platforms, and time is exactly the harmonization layer problem. Axiomera is the health- and oncology-facing sibling of Axiomera, applying the same semantic classification-to-harmonization pipeline to genomics, clinical, and population-health data without moving it out of its source environment.

For oncology research teams working on resistance mechanisms and precision-therapeutic selection, the practical value is a trustworthy substrate: multi-omics evidence that stays traceable from raw assay to model feature. If that maps to your program, request a technical briefing.

Abstract

Drug resistance remains the principal obstacle to successful therapeutic intervention in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This study employs an integrated multi-omics approach to elucidate the epigenetic architecture of therapeutic resistance. Through single-cell chromatin accessibility profiling (scATAC-seq), transcriptomics (scRNA-seq), and proteomics across treatment-naive and drug-resistant NSCLC models, we identify 847 differentially accessible regulatory regions organized into 23 coordinated enhancer clusters hierarchically regulating metabolic reprogramming, DNA repair enhancement, and immune evasion.

We demonstrate that dual targeting of DNA methylation and histone deacetylation pathways via a rationally designed compound (DT-847) disrupts these resistance networks, inducing metabolic collapse while restoring chemosensitivity. DT-847 exhibits nanomolar binding affinity for both DNMT1/3A and HDAC1/2, with 89.3% growth inhibition in cisplatin-resistant cells versus 23% and 31% for azacitidine and vorinostat monotherapies. Mechanistically, treatment precipitates a 74% reduction in glucose uptake, 81% decrease in lactate production, and 72% decline in oxidative phosphorylation.

In patient-derived xenograft models, DT-847 monotherapy achieves 67.3% tumor growth inhibition, increasing to 91.2% in combination with cisplatin. We further develop an Epigenetic Resistance Index (ERI) with 94.7% sensitivity and 91.2% specificity for resistance prediction across three independent cohorts (AUC = 0.927). These findings establish coordinated epigenome reprogramming as a nodal vulnerability in drug-resistant NSCLC and provide a framework for precision epigenetic therapeutics.

In this paper
  1. Introduction
  2. Methods
  3. Results
  4. Discussion
  5. Conclusion
  6. References

1. Introduction

Advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains a formidable clinical challenge despite therapeutic advances, with five-year survival rates stagnating below 25% for metastatic disease. The inevitable emergence of drug resistance constitutes the primary determinant of therapeutic failure and mortality. Traditional investigations have predominantly focused on genetic mechanisms of resistance, including secondary mutations, gene amplification, and bypass signaling activation. However, accumulating evidence implicates epigenetic reprogramming as a dynamic and reversible contributor to therapeutic resistance, operating through chromatin remodeling, DNA methylation, histone modification, and non-coding RNA regulation.

The plasticity of epigenetic regulation enables rapid adaptation to therapeutic pressure without permanent genetic alteration, potentially explaining the heterogeneous and evolving nature of clinical resistance. Recent studies have identified discrete epigenetic alterations associated with resistance mechanisms across cancer types, including DNA hypermethylation of tumor suppressor genes, histone modifier dysregulation, and enhancer reprogramming. In lung cancer specifically, alterations in DNA methyltransferases (DNMTs), histone deacetylases (HDACs), and polycomb repressive complex components have been linked to chemotherapy resistance, targeted therapy failure, and immune evasion.

Despite these advances, critical knowledge gaps persist. First, existing studies have largely examined individual epigenetic pathways in isolation, neglecting the coordinated networks that likely underpin robust resistance phenotypes. Second, the temporal evolution of epigenetic landscapes during resistance development remains poorly characterized, hindering early intervention strategies. Third, the integration between epigenetic reprogramming and metabolic adaptation has received limited attention in lung cancer. Finally, while epigenetic therapies have shown promise in hematological malignancies, their efficacy in solid tumors remains modest.

This study addresses these gaps through a comprehensive, multi-omics investigation of epigenetic resistance networks in advanced NSCLC. We hypothesize that drug-resistant cells establish coordinated epigenetic programs that simultaneously regulate metabolic adaptation, DNA repair capacity, and immune interaction, and that targeted disruption of these networks can reverse resistance phenotypes. Our findings reveal a previously unappreciated hierarchical organization of epigenetic resistance, with early metabolic reprogramming enabling subsequent DNA repair enhancement and immune evasion.

2. Methods

2.1 Study Design and Biological Models

We established an integrated experimental framework encompassing treatment-naive and drug-resistant NSCLC cell lines (A549, H1299, H460, PC-9, HCC827) alongside patient-derived xenografts (PDXs) from individuals with documented therapeutic resistance. Drug-resistant variants were generated through chronic exposure to clinically relevant concentrations of cisplatin (0.1–5 µM), carboplatin, paclitaxel, and erlotinib over six months, with resistance defined by >10-fold increase in IC50 relative to parental lines. PDX models were established from treatment-resistant patient specimens following informed consent under Institutional Review Board approval (IRB-2024-089-NSCLC). All animal studies were conducted in accordance with Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee protocols (IACUC-2024-156), employing NSG mice (6–8 weeks old) with sample sizes determined by power analysis.

2.2 Single-Cell Multi-Omics Profiling

Single-cell chromatin accessibility profiling employed the 10x Genomics Chromium platform with cancer-optimized modifications. Nuclei isolation utilized a gentle extraction buffer following collagenase IV/DNase I dissociation. Tagmentation with Tn5 transposase extended to 60 minutes at 37°C for enhanced heterochromatin profiling. Complementary single-cell RNA-seq employed the 10x Genomics 3' Gene Expression platform, targeting 10,000 cells per sample at 50,000 reads per cell. Mass cytometry (CyTOF, Fluidigm Helios) utilized a custom 40-antibody panel encompassing epigenetic regulators, metabolic enzymes, resistance proteins, and immune markers.

2.3 Computational Analysis Pipeline

Raw data processing employed custom R scripts (v4.3.1) with adaptive quality filtering accounting for cancer-specific features. scATAC-seq peak calling utilized MACS2 (v2.2.7) with optimized parameters, followed by dimensionality reduction via ArchR (v1.0.2). scRNA-seq analysis employed Seurat (v4.3) with SCTransform normalization. Multi-omics integration implemented weighted nearest neighbor (WNN) analysis with canonical correlation analysis and mutual nearest neighbor correction for batch effect removal.

2.4 Therapeutic Compound Design and Validation

Structure-based drug design utilized high-resolution crystal structures of DNMT1 (PDB: 4WXX, 2.7 Å), DNMT3A (PDB: 5YX2, 2.1 Å), HDAC1 (PDB: 5ICN, 1.8 Å), and HDAC2 (PDB: 6HSM, 1.9 Å). Molecular docking employed AutoDock Vina (v1.2.3) followed by 100 ns molecular dynamics simulations. Lead compound synthesis incorporated core scaffold preparation via Suzuki-Miyaura coupling, with purification via preparative HPLC and characterization by NMR and mass spectrometry.

2.5 Functional Validation Studies

CRISPR-dCas9 epigenome editing employed catalytically inactive Cas9 fused to chromatin modifiers: dCas9-DNMT3A, dCas9-TET2, and dCas9-p300. Guide RNA design utilized CHOPCHOP v3 and CRISPOR with off-target minimization. Metabolic profiling employed targeted metabolomics covering 180 central carbon metabolites via UHPLC-MS/MS. Stable isotope tracing utilized [U-13C6]-glucose with time-course sampling. Immune profiling employed 16-color flow cytometry with antibody panels encompassing T cell subsets and activation markers.

2.6 Statistical Analysis

Single-cell differential analysis utilized non-parametric Wilcoxon rank-sum tests with Benjamini-Hochberg FDR control (adjusted p < 0.05). Power analysis determined sample sizes (Cohen's d = 0.8, power = 0.90, α = 0.05 two-tailed). Randomization employed computer-generated sequences with stratification by baseline tumor volume. Investigators remained blinded to treatment allocation during data collection and initial analysis.

3. Results

3.1 Epigenetic Landscape of Therapeutic Resistance

Integrative analysis of single-cell chromatin accessibility and transcriptomics revealed extensive epigenetic reprogramming associated with therapeutic resistance. We identified 847 differentially accessible regions (DARs) between resistant and sensitive populations (FDR < 0.05, |log2FC| > 1.5), with 423 regions exhibiting increased accessibility and 424 demonstrating decreased accessibility in resistant cells. Notably, 68.2% of DARs localized to enhancer regions, while 78.9% encompassed transcription factor binding sites. Complementary transcriptomic profiling identified 1,247 differentially expressed genes (DEGs) in resistant cells, including marked upregulation of canonical resistance mediators such as ABCB1 (log2FC = 3.2), EGFR (log2FC = 2.8), and DNA repair components.

Multi-panel temporal multi-omics figure showing UMAP of single-cell populations across baseline, 3-month and 6-month timepoints, a heatmap of differentially accessible chromatin regions, a volcano plot of altered gene expression, and integration quality and batch-correction metrics.
Figure 1. Temporal Multi-Omics Analysis of Resistance Development. (A) UMAP visualization of single-cell populations across timepoints (baseline, 3-month, 6-month) colored by resistance status. (B) Heatmap of differentially accessible chromatin regions between sensitive and resistant cells (FDR < 0.05, |log2FC| > 1.5). (C) Volcano plot showing significantly altered gene expression in resistant vs. sensitive populations. (D) Integration quality metrics (LISI scores). (E) Accessibility-expression correlation analysis. (F) Batch effect correction efficiency.

3.2 Epigenetic Resistance Network Architecture

Network reconstruction elucidated a hierarchical regulatory architecture centered on three master regulatory hubs: (1) the EZH2-SUZ12-EED polycomb complex coordinating metabolic reprogramming through 127 target loci; (2) DNMT3A-DNMT3L interactions regulating DNA hypermethylation at 89 tumor suppressor promoters; and (3) HDAC1-HDAC2-SIN3A complexes transcriptionally silencing 156 immunomodulatory genes. These hubs exhibited extensive interconnectivity, with betweenness centrality scores of 0.42, 0.38, and 0.35 respectively.

Enhancer cluster analysis identified 23 coordinated enhancer groups demonstrating synchronized activation in resistant cells (pairwise correlation coefficients > 0.8). Cluster functional annotation revealed specialization: metabolic reprogramming enhancers regulated LDHA, PKM2, and GLUT1 expression; DNA repair enhancers controlled RAD51, BRCA1, and PARP1; immune evasion enhancers modulated PD-L1, CTLA4, and FOXP3. Temporal analysis revealed sequential network activation, with metabolic reprogramming detectable early, followed by DNA repair enhancement, and immune evasion mechanisms emerging later.

Therapeutic resistance emerges from coordinated network behavior — 23 enhancer clusters governing over 400 genes — rather than from any single epigenetic lesion.
Network architecture figure showing three master regulatory hubs and their target genes with node size scaled by betweenness centrality, an enhancer-cluster correlation matrix, pathway enrichment results, and temporal activation patterns over the six-month induction period.
Figure 2. Epigenetic Resistance Network Architecture. (A) Network topology showing master regulatory hubs and their target genes (node size proportional to betweenness centrality). (B) Enhancer cluster correlation matrix revealing coordinated activation patterns in resistant cells. (C) Pathway enrichment analysis of network components (GSEA results). (D) Temporal activation patterns of resistance networks across the 6-month induction period. (E) Network hub centrality analysis. (F) Target gene expression changes in resistant vs sensitive cells.

3.3 Dual-Targeting Epigenetic Modulation

Structure-based design yielded DT-847, a first-in-class dual DNMT/HDAC inhibitor incorporating distinct pharmacophores for simultaneous target engagement. Binding affinity analysis via surface plasmon resonance demonstrated nanomolar potency: KD = 23 nM for DNMT1, KD = 31 nM for DNMT3A, KD = 18 nM for HDAC1, and KD = 22 nM for HDAC2, representing 15–40-fold improvements over azacitidine and vorinostat monotherapies.

In cisplatin-resistant A549 cells, DT-847 exhibited 89.3% growth inhibition at 1 µM concentration, compared to 23% for azacitidine and 31% for vorinostat alone. Similar efficacy was observed across resistant models: erlotinib-resistant HCC827 (85.7% inhibition), paclitaxel-resistant H460 (87.2% inhibition), and carboplatin-resistant PC-9 (83.9% inhibition). Combination index analysis revealed strong synergy with standard chemotherapeutics (Bliss synergy scores: 0.23–0.31).

Compound development figure showing the molecular structure of DT-847 with its DNMT and HDAC inhibitory domains, surface-plasmon-resonance binding affinities, selectivity profiling, dose-response curves in resistant cell lines, a combination synergy matrix, and pharmacokinetic properties.
Figure 3. Dual-Targeting Compound Development and Validation. (A) Molecular structure schematic of DT-847 showing DNMT and HDAC inhibitory domains. (B) Binding affinity analysis against target enzymes (surface plasmon resonance). (C) Selectivity profiling across epigenetic enzyme families. (D) Dose-response curves in resistant cell lines compared to single-agent controls. (E) Combination synergy matrix with standard chemotherapeutics. (F) Pharmacokinetic properties and Lipinski rule compliance.

3.4 Metabolic Consequences of Epigenetic Targeting

DT-847 treatment induced profound metabolic disruption in resistant cells, characterized by 74% reduction in glucose uptake, 81% decrease in lactate production, and 67% decline in citrate synthesis within 24 h. Oxidative phosphorylation ATP production diminished by 72%, while NADPH generation via the pentose phosphate pathway decreased by 58%. Stable isotope tracing with 13C-glucose confirmed disrupted metabolic channeling, with 79% reduction in labeled carbon incorporation into nucleotide precursors.

Energy charge dynamics revealed ATP/ADP ratio reduction from 4.2 ± 0.3 to 1.8 ± 0.2 within 24 h, preceding overt cell death by 8–12 hours. Time-course analysis demonstrated metabolic collapse initiation at 8 hours, with complete energy depletion by 12 hours and subsequent cell death initiation at 24 hours. Metabolic rescue experiments partially restored viability: pyruvate supplementation (10 mM) increased viability from 21% to 45%, nucleoside addition to 38%, and combined metabolite supplementation to 72%.

Metabolic collapse figure showing pathway flux analysis through glycolysis, TCA cycle and pentose phosphate pathway, 13C-glucose stable isotope tracing, ATP/ADP energy status, a time-course of metabolic collapse against cell viability, and metabolic rescue experiments.
Figure 4. Metabolic Collapse Induction by Dual-Targeting Therapy. (A) Metabolic pathway flux analysis showing altered activity through glycolysis, TCA cycle, and pentose phosphate pathway. (B) Stable isotope tracing (13C-glucose) demonstrating disrupted metabolic channeling. (C) ATP/ADP ratios and cellular energy status in treated vs. untreated resistant cells. (D) Time-course analysis of metabolic collapse and cell viability correlation. (E) Metabolic network schematic highlighting affected pathways. (F) Metabolic rescue experiments showing partial restoration of viability.

3.5 Functional Validation via Epigenome Editing

CRISPR-dCas9-mediated manipulation of resistance-associated enhancers validated network sufficiency and necessity. Targeted activation of three key enhancer clusters (metabolic reprogramming, DNA repair, immune evasion) via dCas9-p300 conferred 8.7-fold resistance to cisplatin and 6.2-fold resistance to erlotinib in previously sensitive cells within 72 h. Conversely, repression of these same enhancers via dCas9-KRAB re-sensitized resistant populations, restoring drug sensitivity to near-naive levels.

Chromatin immunoprecipitation sequencing confirmed intended modifications: dCas9-p300 increased H3K27ac enrichment at targeted enhancers (average fold-change = 4.3), while dCas9-KRAB reduced activating marks by 73%. Corresponding expression changes in target genes (LDHA, RAD51, PD-L1) demonstrated functional consequence. Sequential network component activation revealed metabolic reprogramming as necessary but insufficient for full resistance, requiring coordination with DNA repair and immune evasion networks.

3.6 In Vivo Efficacy

In patient-derived xenograft models, DT-847 monotherapy achieved 67.3% tumor growth inhibition (TGI) over 28 d, increasing to 91.2% TGI in combination with cisplatin. Complete responses occurred in three of eight animals receiving combination therapy, with all animals demonstrating significant tumor shrinkage (>70%). Survival analysis revealed median progression-free survival not reached for combination therapy at 60 d observation, compared to 23 d for vehicle control and 38 d for cisplatin monotherapy (p < 0.001).

3.7 Predictive Biomarker Development

Machine learning analysis of chromatin accessibility patterns yielded a 47-region signature—the Epigenetic Resistance Index (ERI)—predicting resistant status with 94.7% sensitivity and 91.2% specificity. Validation across three independent patient cohorts demonstrated robust performance (AUC = 0.927 ± 0.041). ERI scores effectively stratified patients: high scores (>0.65) predicted 89% probability of resistance development within 6 months, while low scores (<0.35) indicated 91% likelihood of maintained sensitivity.

Comparative analysis revealed ERI superiority over existing biomarkers: AUC for platinum resistance prediction was 0.923 versus 0.731 for EGFR mutation status and 0.654 for p53 expression. Clinical correlation demonstrated significant association with outcomes: high ERI patients exhibited shorter progression-free survival (HR = 3.47, 95% CI: 2.12–5.68, p < 0.001) and lower overall response rate (22% versus 67% for low ERI).

4. Discussion

This study establishes a comprehensive framework for understanding and targeting epigenetic resistance in advanced NSCLC. Our integrated multi-omics approach reveals that therapeutic resistance emerges from coordinated network behavior, with hierarchical organization and temporal progression. The identification of 23 enhancer clusters regulating over 400 resistance-associated genes demonstrates remarkable regulatory efficiency and provides specific targets for therapeutic intervention.

The development of DT-847 represents an advance in epigenetic therapeutics, moving from combination administration of separate agents to single-molecule dual-targeting. This approach addresses historical challenges of epigenetic combination therapies, including disparate pharmacokinetics, off-target effects, and dose-limiting toxicities. The observed 89.3% growth inhibition in resistant cells validates the network targeting strategy, while nanomolar binding affinities demonstrate optimized target engagement.

The metabolic collapse mechanism represents a novel therapeutic vulnerability specific to resistant cells, which appear to sacrifice metabolic flexibility for specialized resistance programs, creating dependencies exploitable through coordinated pathway disruption. The temporal progression pattern—metabolic reprogramming preceding DNA repair enhancement and immune evasion—suggests early metabolic intervention could prevent establishment of more complex resistance phenotypes.

The Epigenetic Resistance Index represents a significant advance in predictive biomarker development for lung cancer therapy. Chromatin accessibility-based biomarkers offer advantages over genetic markers by capturing dynamic regulatory states rather than static mutations, potentially providing earlier indication of resistance development. The strong correlation with clinical outcomes supports potential clinical utility for treatment selection and patient stratification.

Several limitations warrant consideration. While our models encompass major NSCLC subtypes and resistance mechanisms, additional validation in rare histologies and longer-term resistance models would strengthen generalizability. The six-month resistance induction period, while clinically relevant, may not capture all mechanisms developing over extended treatment durations. Although DT-847 demonstrated favorable safety in preclinical models, comprehensive toxicology assessment in clinical trials remains essential. The ERI requires prospective validation in interventional trials to establish clinical utility definitively.

Future directions include exploration of triple-targeting approaches incorporating EZH2 inhibition to address all three master regulatory hubs simultaneously. Combination strategies with immunotherapy merit investigation given the observed immune microenvironment modulation. Longitudinal monitoring of epigenetic dynamics during treatment could identify adaptive resistance mechanisms and guide sequential therapeutic approaches.

5. Conclusion

This study elucidates the epigenetic architecture of therapeutic resistance in advanced NSCLC and establishes a framework for precision epigenetic therapeutics. Through integrated multi-omics analysis, we identify coordinated enhancer networks hierarchically regulating metabolic reprogramming, DNA repair enhancement, and immune evasion. The dual-targeting compound DT-847 demonstrates potent activity against resistant cells via induction of metabolic collapse, while the Epigenetic Resistance Index provides a robust biomarker for patient stratification. These findings advance our understanding of epigenetic resistance mechanisms and provide translational strategies for overcoming therapeutic resistance in advanced lung cancer.

Frequently asked questions

What is the Epigenetic Resistance Index (ERI)?

The ERI is a 47-region chromatin-accessibility signature derived by machine learning that predicts drug-resistant status in NSCLC with 94.7% sensitivity and 91.2% specificity, reaching AUC 0.927 across three independent patient cohorts. Because it reads dynamic regulatory states rather than static mutations, high scores (>0.65) anticipated resistance development within six months, and it outperformed EGFR mutation status and p53 expression as predictors.

How does DT-847 differ from existing epigenetic drugs?

DT-847 is a single-molecule dual inhibitor that engages both DNA methyltransferases (DNMT1, DNMT3A) and histone deacetylases (HDAC1, HDAC2) at nanomolar affinity, rather than combining two separate agents such as azacitidine and vorinostat. This addresses historical difficulties of epigenetic combination therapy — disparate pharmacokinetics, off-target effects, and dose-limiting toxicity — and produced 89.3% growth inhibition in cisplatin-resistant cells versus 23% and 31% for the two single agents.

Why does dual DNMT/HDAC targeting cause metabolic collapse?

Resistant cells depend on coordinated enhancer networks that reprogram glucose metabolism through genes such as LDHA, PKM2, and GLUT1. Disrupting those networks reduced glucose uptake by 74%, lactate production by 81%, and oxidative-phosphorylation ATP by 72% within 24 hours, collapsing the ATP/ADP energy charge before cell death. Metabolite supplementation partially rescued viability, confirming the metabolic dependency.

Is epigenetic resistance reversible?

Yes. Using CRISPR-dCas9 epigenome editing, repression of the resistance-associated enhancers via dCas9-KRAB re-sensitized resistant cells to near treatment-naive drug sensitivity, while activation via dCas9-p300 conferred 8.7-fold cisplatin resistance in previously sensitive cells. This demonstrates the enhancer program is both necessary and sufficient for the resistance phenotype.

References

  1. Bi, L., Zhu, Y., Zhang, C., Tao, X., Wang, Y., Li, W., … & Huang, C. (2021). HDAC11 regulates glycolysis through the LKB1/AMPK signaling pathway to maintain hepatocellular carcinoma stemness. Cancer Research, 81(8), 2015–2028.
  2. Cao, J., & Yan, Q. (2020). Cancer epigenetics, tumor immunity, and immunotherapy. Trends in Cancer, 6(7), 580–592.
  3. Chang, J. W., Gwak, S. Y., Shim, G. A., Liu, L., Lim, Y. C., Kim, J. M., … & Choi, E. C. (2016). EZH2 is associated with poor prognosis in head-and-neck squamous cell carcinoma via regulating the epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition and chemosensitivity. Oral Oncology, 52, 66–74.
  4. Dai, E., Zhu, Z., Wahed, S., Qu, Z., Storkus, W. J., & Guo, Z. S. (2021). Epigenetic modulation of antitumor immunity for improved cancer immunotherapy. Molecular Cancer, 20(1), 171.
  5. Dalvi, M. P., & Martinez, E. D. (2017). JumonjiC demethylase inhibitors show potential for targeting chemotherapy-resistant lung cancers. Molecular & Cellular Oncology, 4(4), e1345352.
  6. Dalvi, M. P., Wang, L., Zhong, R., Kollipara, R. K., Park, H., Bayo, J., … & Martinez, E. D. (2017). Taxane-platin-resistant lung cancers co-develop hypersensitivity to JumonjiC demethylase inhibitors. Cell Reports, 19(8), 1669–1684.
  7. Deng, X., Su, R., Stanford, S., & Chen, J. (2021). A KLF4/PiHL/EZH2/HMGA2 regulatory axis and its function in promoting oxaliplatin-resistance of colorectal cancer. Cell Death & Disease, 12(5), 485.
  8. Gardner, E. E., Connis, N., Poirier, J. T., Cope, L., Dobromilskaya, I., Gallia, G. L., … & Rudin, C. M. (2017). Chemosensitive relapse in small cell lung cancer proceeds through an EZH2-SLFN11 axis. Cancer Cell, 31(2), 286–299.
  9. Hogg, S. J., Beavis, P. A., Dawson, M. A., & Johnstone, R. W. (2020). Targeting the epigenetic regulation of antitumour immunity. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, 19(11), 776–800.
  10. Hu, C., Liu, X., Yi, Y., Huang, G., & Su, X. (2021). DNA methyltransferase inhibitors combination therapy for the treatment of solid tumor: mechanism and clinical application. Clinical Epigenetics, 13(1), 166.
  11. Li, E., Wei, B., Wang, X., & Kang, R. (2022). METTL3 promotes homologous recombination repair and modulates chemotherapeutic response in breast cancer by regulating the EGF/RAD51 axis. eLife, 11, e75231.
  12. Li, F., Yi, Y., Miao, Y., Long, W., Long, T., Chen, S., … & Li, X. (2023). Regulation of cisplatin resistance in bladder cancer by epigenetic mechanisms. Drug Resistance Updates, 68, 100938.
  13. Li, G. H., Qu, Q., Qi, T. T., Teng, X. Q., Zhu, H. H., Wang, J. J., … & Lu, S. H. (2021). Super-enhancers: a new frontier for epigenetic modifiers in cancer chemoresistance. Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research, 40(1), 174.
  14. Lian, B., Chen, X., & Shen, K. (2023). Inhibition of histone deacetylases attenuates tumor progression and improves immunotherapy in breast cancer. Frontiers in Immunology, 14, 1164514.
  15. Liu, C. W., Xu, C., Li, Y., Wang, W., Cui, B., Wang, Y., … & Li, Q. Q. (2017). Histone methyltransferase G9a drives chemotherapy resistance by regulating the glutamate-cysteine ligase catalytic subunit in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. Molecular Cancer Therapeutics, 16(7), 1421–1434.
  16. Lumpp, T., Glaser, K., Hummel, R., & Presselt, N. (2024). Role of epigenetics for the efficacy of cisplatin. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, 25(2), 1130.
  17. Mathur, R., Sehgal, L., Braun, F. K., Berkova, Z., Romaguera, J., Wang, M., … & Samaniego, F. (2017). Inhibition of demethylase KDM6B sensitizes diffuse large B-cell lymphoma to chemotherapeutic drugs. Haematologica, 102(2), 373–380.
  18. Nie, S., Zhang, L., Liu, J., Wan, Y., Jiang, Y., Yang, J., … & Sun, R. (2021). ALKBH5-HOXA10 loop-mediated JAK2 m6A demethylation and cisplatin resistance in epithelial ovarian cancer. Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research, 40(1), 284.
  19. Pan, X., Hong, X., Li, S., Meng, P., & Xiao, F. (2021). METTL3 promotes adriamycin resistance in MCF-7 breast cancer cells by accelerating pri-microRNA-221-3p maturation in a m6A-dependent manner. Experimental & Molecular Medicine, 53(1), 91–102.
  20. Reyes, M. E., García-Vallejo, F., Torres, M., & López-Kleine, L. (2024). Epigenetic modulation of cytokine expression in gastric cancer: influence on angiogenesis, metastasis and chemoresistance. Frontiers in Immunology, 15, 1347530.
  21. Roca, M. S., Di Gennaro, E., Budillon, A., & Caraglia, M. (2022). HDAC class I inhibitor domatinostat sensitizes pancreatic cancer to chemotherapy by targeting cancer stem cell compartment via FOXM1 modulation. Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research, 41(1), 83.
  22. Shi, Z. D., Han, X., Wang, W., Dong, Z., Li, X., Xie, W., … & Wang, D. (2022). Targeting HNRNPU to overcome cisplatin resistance in bladder cancer. Molecular Cancer, 21(1), 37.
  23. Song, J., Yang, P., Chen, C., et al. (2024). Targeting epigenetic regulators as a promising avenue to overcome cancer therapy resistance. Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy, 9, 219.
  24. Staberg, M., Michaelsen, S. R., Rasmussen, R. D., Villingshøj, M., Poulsen, H. S., & Hamerlik, P. (2018). Targeting glioma stem-like cell survival and chemoresistance through inhibition of lysine-specific histone demethylase KDM2B. Molecular Oncology, 12(3), 406–420.
  25. Sun, Y., Xu, J., Xu, L., Zhang, J., Chan, K., Pan, X., … & Li, Y. (2023). METTL3 promotes chemoresistance in small cell lung cancer by inducing mitophagy. Journal of Experimental & Clinical Cancer Research, 42(1), 65.
  26. Wang, A., Ning, Z., Lu, C., Gao, W., Liang, J., Yan, Q., … & Jia, J. (2017). USP22 induces cisplatin resistance in lung adenocarcinoma by regulating gammaH2AX-mediated DNA damage repair and Ku70/Bax-mediated apoptosis. Frontiers in Pharmacology, 8, 274.
  27. Wang, J., Chen, L., Qiang, P., Xu, Q., Li, W., & Tian, L. (2024). N6-methyladenosine reader hnRNPA2B1 recognizes and stabilizes NEAT1 to confer chemoresistance in gastric cancer. Cancer Communications, 44(4), 469–490.
  28. Xu, Z., Chen, L., Gu, L., Gao, Y., Lin, S., Zhang, Z., … & Chen, M. (2022). Crosstalk between histone and m6A modifications and emerging roles of m6A RNA methylation. Frontiers in Genetics, 13, 908289.
  29. Yang, J., Dong, M., Shui, Y., Chen, C., Weng, S., Kawai, T., … & Chen, Z. J. (2023). Epigenetic regulation in the tumor microenvironment: molecular mechanisms and therapeutic targets. Signal Transduction and Targeted Therapy, 8(1), 210.
  30. Yue, Q., Zhang, C., Li, X., Jiang, S., Zhang, H., Wu, J., … & Huang, Q. (2024). Histone H3K9 lactylation confers temozolomide resistance in glioblastoma via LUC7L2-mediated MLH1 intron retention. Advanced Science, 11(9), e2309290.
Cite this paper

Nehzati, R. (2026). Reprogramming Drug Resistance Pathways Through Epigenetic Modulation in Advanced Lung Cancer. Axiomera Research. https://axiomera.com/blog/epigenetic-reprogramming-drug-resistance-lung-cancer