Back

Comprehensive analysis of TEAD inhibition in meningioma identifies MEK and mTOR inhibition as effective combination therapies against resistant lines.

Keiser, D. J.; Buddy, M. S.; Mojarad-Jabali, S.; Li, Q.; Kohler-Skinner, M.; Gillespie, D.; Nix, D.; Colman, H.; Couldwell, W.; Jensen, R.; Szulzewsky, F.

2026-03-24 cancer biology
10.64898/2026.03.20.713271 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Meningiomas are the most common primary central nervous system tumors in adults, posing a significant burden to society. Although a large percentage of lower-grade meningiomas are curable by surgery or radiation alone, high-grade and a subset of low-grade meningiomas demonstrate recurrences and complications from treatment. Systemic therapies for meningioma remain ineffective, and no targeted treatments are approved. Despite the central role of YAP1/TAZ-TEAD signaling in NF2-deficient/mutant tumors, no studies have systematically examined TEAD inhibition across molecularly defined meningioma subtypes or investigated mechanisms of resistance in this disease. We have recently shown that YAP1/TAZ signaling is an oncogenic driver of meningioma. Here, using established and patient-derived meningioma cell lines, we demonstrate that genetic ablation of YAP1/TAZ suppresses growth in both NF2 mutant and NF2 wild type cell lines, establishing YAP1/TAZ-TEAD signaling as a shared oncogenic dependency. Pharmacologic TEAD inhibition suppressed growth of benign NF2 mutant and a subset of higher-grade NF2 mutant meningiomas, whereas NF2 wild type meningiomas were generally more resistant. RNA-Seq and Western Blot analysis identified compensatory activation of MEK-ERK, mTOR-S6, and FAK signaling in resistant lines exhibit. Importantly, co-targeting these pathways was able to overcome resistance to TEADi and was superior to MEK/mTOR/FAK inhibition alone. These studies provide a compelling proof-of-concept that TEADi represents a novel therapeutic vulnerability in meningioma and reveal adaptive signaling responses that can be therapeutically exploited.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 10%
14.7%
2
Neuro-Oncology
30 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
12.5%
3
Cancer Cell
38 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.1%
4
Cell Reports
1338 papers in training set
Top 7%
6.4%
5
Acta Neuropathologica
51 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
4.3%
6
Clinical Cancer Research
58 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
4.0%
50% of probability mass above
7
Cancer Research
116 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
3.6%
8
Science Translational Medicine
111 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
3.6%
9
Journal of Clinical Investigation
164 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.7%
10
Cancer Discovery
61 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.7%
11
Brain
154 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
12
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 28%
2.1%
13
Science Advances
1098 papers in training set
Top 14%
1.9%
14
Neuro-Oncology Advances
24 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.9%
15
Molecular Cancer
14 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.8%
16
Oncogene
76 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
17
Cell Genomics
162 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.7%
18
Cell Reports Medicine
140 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.7%
19
Science
429 papers in training set
Top 17%
1.1%
20
JCI Insight
241 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.9%
21
PLOS Biology
408 papers in training set
Top 15%
0.9%
22
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 52%
0.9%
23
Journal for ImmunoTherapy of Cancer
64 papers in training set
Top 1.0%
0.8%
24
Cell
370 papers in training set
Top 16%
0.8%
25
Journal of Experimental Medicine
106 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.8%
26
EMBO Molecular Medicine
85 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.7%
27
Gastroenterology
40 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.7%
28
Nature Cancer
35 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.6%
29
Cancers
200 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.6%
30
Nature Genetics
240 papers in training set
Top 8%
0.6%