Most anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-rearranged non-small-cell lung tumors initially respond to small-molecule ALK inhibitors, but drug resistance often develops1,2,3,4. Of tumors that develop resistance to highly potent second-generation ALK inhibitors, approximately half harbor resistance mutations in ALK, while the other half have other mechanisms underlying resistance. Members of the latter group often have activation of at least one of several different tyrosine kinases driving resistance5. Such tumors are not expected to respond to lorlatinib—a third-generation inhibitor targeting ALK that is able to overcome all clinically identified resistant mutations in ALK5,6—and further therapeutic options are limited5. Herein, we deployed a shRNA screen of 1,000 genes in multiple ALK-inhibitor-resistant patient-derived cells (PDCs) to discover those that confer sensitivity to ALK inhibition. This approach identified SHP2, a nonreceptor protein tyrosine phosphatase, as a common targetable resistance node in multiple PDCs. SHP2 provides a parallel survival input downstream of multiple tyrosine kinases that promote resistance to ALK inhibitors. Treatment with SHP099, the recently discovered small-molecule inhibitor of SHP2, in combination with the ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) ceritinib halted the growth of resistant PDCs through preventing compensatory RAS and ERK1 and ERK2 (ERK1/2) reactivation. These findings suggest that combined ALK and SHP2 inhibition may be a promising therapeutic strategy for resistant cancers driven by several different ALK-independent mechanisms underlying resistance.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.


  1. 1.

    et al. First-line crizotinib versus chemotherapy in ALK-positive lung cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 371, 2167–2177 (2014).

  2. 2.

    et al. Crizotinib versus chemotherapy in advanced ALK-positive lung cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 368, 2385–2394 (2013).

  3. 3.

    et al. Ceritinib in ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 370, 1189–1197 (2014).

  4. 4.

    & Treating ALK-positive lung cancer—early successes and future challenges. Nat. Rev. Clin. Oncol. 9, 268–277 (2012).

  5. 5.

    et al. Molecular mechanisms of resistance to first- and second-generation ALK inhibitors in ALK-rearranged lung cancer. Cancer Discov. 6, 1118–1133 (2016).

  6. 6.

    et al. PF-06463922, an ALK/ROS1 inhibitor, overcomes resistance to first and second generation ALK inhibitors in preclinical models. Cancer Cell 28, 70–81 (2015).

  7. 7.

    et al. EML4-ALK mutations in lung cancer that confer resistance to ALK inhibitors. N. Engl. J. Med. 363, 1734–1739 (2010).

  8. 8.

    et al. Mechanisms of resistance to crizotinib in patients with ALK gene rearranged non-small cell lung cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 18, 1472–1482 (2012).

  9. 9.

    et al. Therapeutic strategies to overcome crizotinib resistance in non-small cell lung cancers harboring the fusion oncogene EML4-ALK. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 108, 7535–7540 (2011).

  10. 10.

    et al. Mechanisms of acquired crizotinib resistance in ALK-rearranged lung cancers. Sci. Transl. Med. 4, 120ra17 (2012).

  11. 11.

    et al. Heterogeneity of genetic changes associated with acquired crizotinib resistance in ALK-rearranged lung cancer. J. Thorac. Oncol. 8, 415–422 (2013).

  12. 12.

    et al. A novel ALK secondary mutation and EGFR signaling cause resistance to ALK kinase inhibitors. Cancer Res. 71, 6051–6060 (2011).

  13. 13.

    et al. Patient-derived models of acquired resistance can identify effective drug combinations for cancer. Science 346, 1480–1486 (2014).

  14. 14.

    et al. Rationale for co-targeting IGF-1R and ALK in ALK fusion-positive lung cancer. Nat. Med. 20, 1027–1034 (2014).

  15. 15.

    , , , & Multiple requirements for SHPTP2 in epidermal growth factor-mediated cell cycle progression. Mol. Cell. Biol. 16, 1189–1202 (1996).

  16. 16.

    et al. A lipid-anchored Grb2-binding protein that links FGF-receptor activation to the Ras/MAPK signaling pathway. Cell 89, 693–702 (1997).

  17. 17.

    , , , & Molecular mechanism for the Shp-2 tyrosine phosphatase function in promoting growth factor stimulation of Erk activity. Mol. Cell. Biol. 20, 1526–1536 (2000).

  18. 18.

    et al. Shp2 regulates SRC family kinase activity and Ras/Erk activation by controlling Csk recruitment. Mol. Cell 13, 341–355 (2004).

  19. 19.

    , & The 'Shp'ing news: SH2 domain–containing tyrosine phosphatases in cell signaling. Trends Biochem. Sci. 28, 284–293 (2003).

  20. 20.

    , , , & Protein-tyrosine-phosphatase SHPTP2 couples platelet-derived growth factor receptor beta to Ras. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 91, 7335–7339 (1994).

  21. 21.

    , & SH2-containing phosphotyrosine phosphatase as a target of protein-tyrosine kinases. Science 259, 1607–1611 (1993).

  22. 22.

    , , , & Role of SH-PTP2, a protein-tyrosine phosphatase with Src homology 2 domains, in insulin-stimulated Ras activation. Mol. Cell. Biol. 14, 6674–6682 (1994).

  23. 23.

    , & Genetic analysis of protein tyrosine phosphatases. Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev. 8, 112–126 (1998).

  24. 24.

    et al. Allosteric inhibition of SHP2: identification of a potent, selective, and orally efficacious phosphatase inhibitor. J. Med. Chem. 59, 7773–7782 (2016).

  25. 25.

    et al. Allosteric inhibition of SHP2 phosphatase inhibits cancers driven by receptor tyrosine kinases. Nature 535, 148–152 (2016).

  26. 26.

    et al. Regulation of the mitogen-activated protein kinase signaling pathway by SHP2. J. Biol. Chem. 277, 9498–9504 (2002).

  27. 27.

    et al. (V600E)BRAF is associated with disabled feedback inhibition of RAF–MEK signaling and elevated transcriptional output of the pathway. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 106, 4519–4524 (2009).

  28. 28.

    et al. Dynamic reprogramming of the kinome in response to targeted MEK inhibition in triple-negative breast cancer. Cell 149, 307–321 (2012).

  29. 29.

    et al. RAS–MAPK dependence underlies a rational polytherapy strategy in EML4-ALK-positive lung cancer. Nat. Med. 21, 1038–1047 (2015).

Download references


We thank D. Rakiec for help with NGS and C. Liu for help with in vivo experiments. This study was supported by grants from Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, American Association for Cancer Research (AACR)–AstraZeneca Fellowship in Lung Cancer Research (17-40-12-DARD to L.D.), National Cancer Institute (R01CA164273 to A.T.S.), the Wellcome Trust (102696 to C.H.B.) and the National Foundation for Cancer Research (to A.T.S.), by Be a Piece of the Solution and by LungStrong.

Author information

Author notes

    • Luc Friboulet
    •  & Fang Li

    Present addresses: Gustave Roussy Cancer Campus, Université Paris Saclay, INSERM U981, Paris, France (L.F.) and Tango Therapeutics, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA (F.L.).

    • Cyril H Benes
    • , Fang Li
    •  & Jeffrey A Engelman

    These authors contributed equally to this work.


  1. Cancer Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Charlestown, Massachusetts, USA.

    • Leila Dardaei
    • , Manrose Singh
    • , Katherine X Shaw
    • , Satoshi Yoda
    • , Michael S Lawrence
    • , Adam Langenbucher
    • , Justin F Gainor
    • , Luc Friboulet
    • , Ibiayi Dagogo-Jack
    • , David T Myers
    • , Melissa Parks
    • , Dana Lee
    • , Richard H DiCecca
    • , Alice T Shaw
    • , Aaron N Hata
    •  & Cyril H Benes
  2. Department of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

    • Leila Dardaei
    • , Satoshi Yoda
    • , Alice T Shaw
    • , Aaron N Hata
    •  & Cyril H Benes
  3. Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.

    • Hui Qin Wang
    • , Paul Fordjour
    • , Kristine Yu
    • , Jinsheng Liang
    • , Yichen Cao
    • , Yan Chen
    • , Emma Labrot
    • , David Ruddy
    • , Susan Moody
    • , Huaixiang Hao
    • , Morvarid Mohseni
    • , Matthew LaMarche
    • , Juliet Williams
    • , Keith Hoffmaster
    • , Giordano Caponigro
    • , Fang Li
    •  & Jeffrey A Engelman
  4. Novartis Institutes for BioMedical Research, Basal, Switzerland.

    • Grainne Kerr
  5. Broad Institute of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.

    • Michael S Lawrence


  1. Search for Leila Dardaei in:

  2. Search for Hui Qin Wang in:

  3. Search for Manrose Singh in:

  4. Search for Paul Fordjour in:

  5. Search for Katherine X Shaw in:

  6. Search for Satoshi Yoda in:

  7. Search for Grainne Kerr in:

  8. Search for Kristine Yu in:

  9. Search for Jinsheng Liang in:

  10. Search for Yichen Cao in:

  11. Search for Yan Chen in:

  12. Search for Michael S Lawrence in:

  13. Search for Adam Langenbucher in:

  14. Search for Justin F Gainor in:

  15. Search for Luc Friboulet in:

  16. Search for Ibiayi Dagogo-Jack in:

  17. Search for David T Myers in:

  18. Search for Emma Labrot in:

  19. Search for David Ruddy in:

  20. Search for Melissa Parks in:

  21. Search for Dana Lee in:

  22. Search for Richard H DiCecca in:

  23. Search for Susan Moody in:

  24. Search for Huaixiang Hao in:

  25. Search for Morvarid Mohseni in:

  26. Search for Matthew LaMarche in:

  27. Search for Juliet Williams in:

  28. Search for Keith Hoffmaster in:

  29. Search for Giordano Caponigro in:

  30. Search for Alice T Shaw in:

  31. Search for Aaron N Hata in:

  32. Search for Cyril H Benes in:

  33. Search for Fang Li in:

  34. Search for Jeffrey A Engelman in:


L.D., F.L., A.T.S., A.N.H., C.H.B. and J.A.E. designed the study and analyzed the data. L.D., C.H.B. and J.A.E. wrote the paper. G.C., F.L., J.A.E. and C.H.B. supervised the studies. L.D., F.L., M.S., P.F., S.Y., K.Y., Y. Cao, Y. Chen, K.X.S. and E.L. performed cell line and biochemical studies. L.D., D.T.M., J.L. and H.Q.W. performed tumor xenograft studies. M.P., R.H.D. and D.L. developed or maintained patient-derived cell lines. G.K., F.L. and D.R. performed shRNA screen analyses. M.S.L. and A.L. performed NGS analysis. J.F.G., I.D.-J., L.F., E.L., S.M., H.H., M.M., M.L., J.W., K.H. and G.C. were involved with the study design. All authors discussed the results and commented on the manuscript.

Competing interests

H.Q.W., P.F., G.K., K.Y., J.L., Y. Cao, Y. Chen, E.L., D.R., S.M., H.H., M.M., M.L., J.W., K.H., G.C., F.L. and J.A.E. are employees of Novartis. J.F.G. has served as a compensated consultant or received honoraria from Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genentech, Ariad, Loxo, Incyte, Novartis, Merck and Clovis. A.T.S. has served as a compensated consultant or received honoraria from Pfizer, Novartis, Genentech, Roche, Ignyta, Blueprint Medicine, Daiichi-Sankyo, Ariad, Chugai, Taiho Pharmaceuticals and EMD Serono. C.H.B. has received research funding from Novartis and Amgen. A.N.H. has received research funding from Novartis, Relay Therapeutics and Amgen. The remaining authors have no financial interests to declare.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Cyril H Benes or Fang Li or Jeffrey A Engelman.

Supplementary information

PDF files

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Tables & Figures

    Supplementary Tables 1–4 & Supplementary Figures 1–11

  2. 2.

    Life Sciences Reporting Summary

About this article

Publication history






Further reading