Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 30, 2026

Orthotopic Implantation and Peripheral Immune Cell Monitoring in the II-45 Syngeneic Rat Mesothelioma Model
Published on: October 2, 2015
Experimental assessment of computationally nominated small molecules targeting the YAP-TEAD interface in Hippo
Glen J Weiss1,2, Joseph C Loftus3, David W Mallery1
1International Genomics Consortium, Phoenix, AZ, United States.
Abstract:
Aberrant activation of the Hippo-YAP/TAZ-TEAD transcriptional axis is a recurrent feature of multiple solid tumors and contributes to tumor maintenance, lineage plasticity, and therapeutic resistance. Recent medicinal chemistry has shown that TEAD proteins are druggable, but the rate at which in silico screening nominates compounds that prove functionally active in cells remains poorly defined, and negative validation results are rarely reported. Here we describe an experimental assessment of a focused set of computationally nominated candidate compounds, selected from a structure-guided virtual screen of the YAP-TEAD interface across approximately 917,000 library compounds and three predicted binding sites. Candidates were evaluated using long-term (144 hour) CellTiter-Glo proliferation assays in three Hippo-altered malignant pleural mesothelioma cell lines (MSTO-211H, NCI-H2052, NCI-H226), with the validated TEAD inhibitor K-975 and cisplatin as positive controls, and an exploratory TEAD-responsive luciferase reporter in MCF7 cells. K-975 produced dose-dependent antiproliferative activity in MSTO-211H and NCI-H2052, with reduced sensitivity in NCI-H226, while cisplatin reduced viability in all lines. In contrast, the computationally nominated compounds, including AG-690/36549045, AN-655/40856217, and additional library members, did not produce measurable antiproliferative activity at the concentrations tested. In the exploratory reporter, apparent suppression of TEAD activity consistently co-occurred with loss of cell viability, a pattern consistent with cytotoxicity rather than selective transcriptional inhibition; no TEAD-active reference compound was co-tested within the reporter panel, and no direct YAP-TEAD biochemical or target-engagement assay was performed. These results describe a case in which computational nomination at the YAP-TEAD interface showed limited concordance with cell-based activity and provide a transparent account of negative findings to inform expectations for early-stage discovery targeting Hippo-dependent transcriptional programs.
