We previously showed microRNAs (miRNAs) in plasma are potential biomarkers for colorectal cancer detection. Here, we aimed to develop specific blood-based miRNA assay for breast cancer detection.
...TaqMan-based miRNA profiling was performed in tumor, adjacent non-tumor, corresponding plasma from breast cancer patients, and plasma from matched healthy controls. All putative markers identified were verified in a training set of breast cancer patients. Selected markers were validated in a case-control cohort of 170 breast cancer patients, 100 controls, and 95 other types of cancers and then blindly validated in an independent set of 70 breast cancer patients and 50 healthy controls. Profiling results showed 8 miRNAs were concordantly up-regulated and 1 miRNA was concordantly down-regulated in both plasma and tumor tissue of breast cancer patients. Of the 8 up-regulated miRNAs, only 3 were significantly elevated (p<0.0001) before surgery and reduced after surgery in the training set. Results from the validation cohort showed that a combination of miR-145 and miR-451 was the best biomarker (p<0.0001) in discriminating breast cancer from healthy controls and all other types of cancers. In the blind validation, these plasma markers yielded Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curve area of 0.931. The positive predictive value was 88% and the negative predictive value was 92%. Altered levels of these miRNAs in plasma have been detected not only in advanced stages but also early stages of tumors. The positive predictive value for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) cases was 96%.
These results suggested that these circulating miRNAs could be a potential specific biomarker for breast cancer screening.
Celotno besedilo
Dostopno za:
DOBA, IZUM, KILJ, NUK, PILJ, PNG, SAZU, SIK, UILJ, UKNU, UL, UM, UPUK
IMPORTANCE: Aside from the multikinase inhibitor sorafenib, there are no effective systemic therapies for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of ...everolimus in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma for whom sorafenib treatment failed. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: EVOLVE-1 was a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study conducted among 546 adults with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or C hepatocellular carcinoma and Child-Pugh A liver function whose disease progressed during or after sorafenib or who were intolerant of sorafenib. Patients were enrolled from 17 countries between May 2010 and March 2012. Randomization was stratified by region (Asia vs rest of world) and macrovascular invasion (present vs absent). INTERVENTIONS: Everolimus, 7.5 mg/d, or matching placebo, both given in combination with best supportive care and continued until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. Per the 2:1 randomization scheme, 362 patients were randomized to the everolimus group and 184 patients to the placebo group. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points included time to progression and the disease control rate (the percentage of patients with a best overall response of complete or partial response or stable disease). RESULTS: No significant difference in overall survival was seen between treatment groups, with 303 deaths (83.7%) in the everolimus group and 151 deaths (82.1%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.86-1.27; P = .68; median overall survival, 7.6 months with everolimus, 7.3 months with placebo). Median time to progression with everolimus and placebo was 3.0 months and 2.6 months, respectively (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.75-1.15), and disease control rate was 56.1% and 45.1%, respectively (P = .01). The most common grade 3/4 adverse events for everolimus vs placebo were anemia (7.8% vs 3.3%, respectively), asthenia (7.8% vs 5.5%, respectively), and decreased appetite (6.1% vs 0.5%, respectively). No patients experienced hepatitis C viral flare. Based on central laboratory results, hepatitis B viral reactivation was experienced by 39 patients (29 everolimus, 10 placebo); all cases were asymptomatic, but 3 everolimus recipients discontinued therapy. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Everolimus did not improve overall survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma whose disease progressed during or after receiving sorafenib or who were intolerant of sorafenib. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01035229
Brivanib is a dual inhibitor of vascular-endothelial growth factor and fibroblast growth factor receptors that are implicated in the pathogenesis of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Our multinational, ...randomized, double-blind, phase III trial compared brivanib with sorafenib as first-line treatment for HCC.
Advanced HCC patients who had no prior systemic therapy were randomly assigned (ratio, 1:1) to receive sorafenib 400 mg twice daily orally (n = 578) or brivanib 800 mg once daily orally (n = 577). Primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included time to progression (TTP), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) based on modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (mRECIST), and safety.
The primary end point of OS noninferiority for brivanib versus sorafenib in the per-protocol population (n = 1,150) was not met (hazard ratio HR, 1.06; 95.8% CI, 0.93 to 1.22), based on the prespecified margin (upper CI limit for HR ≤ 1.08). Median OS was 9.9 months for sorafenib and 9.5 months for brivanib. TTP, ORR, and DCR were similar between the study arms. Most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events for sorafenib and brivanib were hyponatremia (9% and 23%, respectively), AST elevation (17% and 14%), fatigue (7% and 15%), hand-foot-skin reaction (15% and 2%), and hypertension (5% and 13%). Discontinuation as a result of adverse events was 33% for sorafenib and 43% for brivanib; rates for dose reduction were 50% and 49%, respectively.
Our study did not meet its primary end point of OS noninferiority for brivanib versus sorafenib. However, both agents had similar antitumor activity, based on secondary efficacy end points. Brivanib had an acceptable safety profile, but was less well-tolerated than sorafenib.
Background & Aims We aimed to develop a prognostic classification scheme with treatment guidance for Asian patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Methods We collected data from 3856 patients ...with HCC predominantly related to hepatitis B treated at Queen Mary Hospital in Hong Kong from January 1995 through December 2008. Data on patient performance status, Child–Pugh grade, tumor status (size, number of nodules, and presence of intrahepatic vascular invasion), and presence of extrahepatic vascular invasion or metastasis were included, and randomly separated into training and test sets for analysis. Cox regression and classification and regression tree analyses were used to account for the relative effects of factors in predicting overall survival times and to classify disparate treatment decision rules, respectively; the staging system and treatment recommendation then were constructed by integration of clinical judgments. The Hong Kong Liver Cancer (HKLC) classification was compared with the Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) classification in terms of discriminatory ability and effectiveness of treatment recommendation. Results The HKLC system had significantly better ability than the BCLC system to distinguish between patients with specific overall survival times (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve values, approximately 0.84 vs 0.80; concordance index, 0.74 vs 0.70). More importantly, HKLC identified subsets of BCLC intermediate- and advanced-stage patients for more aggressive treatments than what were recommended by the BCLC system, which improved survival outcomes. Of BCLC-B patients classified as HKLC-II in our system, the survival benefit of radical therapies, compared with transarterial chemoembolization, was substantial (5-year survival probability, 52.1% vs 18.7%; P < .0001). In BCLC-C patients classified as HKLC-II, the survival benefit of radical therapies compared with systemic therapy was even more pronounced (5-year survival probability, 48.6% vs 0.0%; P < .0001). Conclusions We collected data from patients with HCC in Hong Kong to create a system to identify patients who are suitable for more aggressive treatment than the currently used BCLC system. The HKLC system should be validated in non-Asian patient populations and in patients with different etiologies of HCC.
Chemoresistance presents a major obstacle to the efficacy of chemotherapeutic treatment of cancers. Using chemotherapeutic drugs to select drug‐resistant cancer cells in hepatocellular carcinoma ...(HCC) and several other cancer cell lines, we demonstrate that chemoresistant cells displayed cancer stem cell features, such as increased self‐renewal ability, cell motility, multiple drug resistance, and tumorigenicity. Octamer 4 (Oct4) messenger RNA (mRNA) levels were dramatically increased in chemoresistant cancer cells due to DNA demethylation regulation of Oct4. By functional study, Oct4 overexpression enhanced whereas Oct4 knockdown reduced liver cancer cell resistance to chemotherapeutic drugs in vitro and in xenograft tumors. It is known that the Oct4‐TCL1‐AKT pathway acts on embryonic stem cells and cancer stem cells in cell proliferation through inhibition of apoptosis. We further demonstrate that Oct4 overexpression induced activation of TCL1, AKT, and ABCG2 to mediate chemoresistance, which can be overcome by addition of the PI3K/AKT inhibitor; therefore, a direct pathway of Oct4‐TCL1‐AKT‐ABCG2 or a combination of Oct4‐TCL1‐AKT with the AKT‐ABCG2 pathway could be a potential new mechanism involved in liver cancer cell chemoresistance. Moreover, the clinical significance of the Oct4‐AKT‐ABCG2 pathway can be demonstrated in HCC patients, with a strong correlation of expression patterns in human HCC tumors. The role of the Oct4‐AKT‐ABCG2 axis in cancer cell chemoresistant machinery suggests that AKT pathway inhibition (PI3K inhibitors) not only inhibits cancer cell proliferation, but may also enhance chemosensitivity by target potential chemoresistant cells. Conclusion: Oct4, a transcriptional factor of pluripotent cells, can mediate chemoresistance through a potential Oct4‐AKT‐ABCG2 pathway. (HEPATOLOGY 2010;)
Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a heterogeneous disease with poor prognosis and limited methods for predicting patient survival. The nature of the immune cells that infiltrate tumours is known to ...impact clinical outcome. However, the molecular events that regulate this infiltration require further understanding. Here the ability of immune genes expressed in the tumour microenvironment to predict disease progression was investigated.
Using quantitative PCR, the expression of 14 immune genes in resected tumour tissues from 57 Singaporean patients was analysed. The nearest-template prediction method was used to derive and test a prognostic signature from this training cohort. The signature was then validated in an independent cohort of 98 patients from Hong Kong and Zurich. Intratumoural components expressing these critical immune genes were identified by in situ labelling. Regulation of these genes was analysed in vitro using the HCC cell line SNU-182.
The identified 14 immune-gene signature predicts patient survival in both the training cohort (p=0.0004 and HR=5.2) and the validation cohort (p=0.0051 and HR=2.5) irrespective of patient ethnicity and disease aetiology. Importantly, it predicts the survival of patients with early disease (stages I and II), for whom classical clinical parameters provide limited information. The lack of predictive power in late disease stages III and IV emphasises that a protective immune microenvironment has to be established early in order to impact disease progression significantly. This signature includes the chemokine genes CXCL10, CCL5 and CCL2, whose expression correlates with markers of T helper 1 (Th1), CD8(+) T and natural killer (NK) cells. Inflammatory cytokines (tumour necrosis factor α, interferon γ) and Toll-like receptor 3 ligands stimulate intratumoural production of these chemokines which drive tumour infiltration by T and NK cells, leading to enhanced cancer cell death.
A 14 immune-gene signature, which identifies molecular cues driving tumour infiltration by lymphocytes, accurately predicts survival of patients with HCC especially in early disease.
Introduction
The Asian Pacific Association for the Study of the Liver (APASL) convened an international working party on the management of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) in December 2008 to develop ...consensus recommendations.
Methods
The working party consisted of expert hepatologist, hepatobiliary surgeon, radiologist, and oncologist from Asian-Pacific region, who were requested to make drafts prior to the consensus meeting held at Bali, Indonesia on 4 December 2008. The quality of existing evidence and strength of recommendations were ranked from 1 (highest) to 5 (lowest) and from A (strongest) to D (weakest), respectively, according to the Oxford system of evidence-based approach for developing the consensus statements.
Results
Participants of the consensus meeting assessed the quality of cited studies and assigned grades to the recommendation statements. Finalized recommendations were presented at the fourth APASL single topic conference on viral-related HCC at Bali, Indonesia and approved by the participants of the conference.
Summary Background There is no standard of care for adjuvant therapy for patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. This trial was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of sorafenib versus placebo ...as adjuvant therapy in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma after surgical resection or local ablation. Methods We undertook this phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma with a complete radiological response after surgical resection (n=900) or local ablation (n=214) in 202 sites (hospitals and research centres) in 28 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 400 mg oral sorafenib or placebo twice a day, for a maximum of 4 years, according to a block randomisation scheme (block size of four) using an interactive voice-response system. Patients were stratified by curative treatment, geography, Child-Pugh status, and recurrence risk. The primary outcome was recurrence-free survival assessed after database cut-off on Nov 29, 2013. We analysed efficacy in the intention-to-treat population and safety in randomly assigned patients receiving at least one study dose. The final analysis is reported. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov , number NCT00692770. Findings We screened 1602 patients between Aug 15, 2008, and Nov 17, 2010, and randomly assigned 1114 patients. Of 556 patients in the sorafenib group, 553 (>99%) received the study treatment and 471 (85%) terminated treatment. Of 558 patients in the placebo group, 554 (99%) received the study treatment and 447 (80%) terminated treatment. Median duration of treatment and mean daily dose were 12·5 months (IQR 2·6–35·8) and 577 mg per day (SD 212·8) for sorafenib, compared with 22·2 months (8·1–38·8) and 778·0 mg per day (79·8) for placebo. Dose modification was reported for 497 (89%) of 559 patients in the sorafenib group and 206 (38%) of 548 patients in the placebo group. At final analysis, 464 recurrence-free survival events had occurred (270 in the placebo group and 194 in the sorafenib group). Median follow-up for recurrence-free survival was 8·5 months (IQR 2·9–19·5) in the sorafenib group and 8·4 months (2·9–19·8) in the placebo group. We noted no difference in median recurrence-free survival between the two groups (33·3 months in the sorafenib group vs 33·7 months in the placebo group; hazard ratio HR 0·940; 95% CI 0·780–1·134; one-sided p=0·26). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were hand-foot skin reaction (154 28% of 559 patients in the sorafenib group vs four <1% of 548 patients in the placebo group) and diarrhoea (36 6% vs five <1% in the placebo group). Sorafenib-related serious adverse events included hand-foot skin reaction (ten 2%), abnormal hepatic function (four <1%), and fatigue (three <1%). There were four (<1%) drug-related deaths in the sorafenib group and two (<1%) in the placebo group. Interpretation Our data indicate that sorafenib is not an effective intervention in the adjuvant setting for hepatocellular carcinoma following resection or ablation. Funding Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals and Onyx Pharmaceuticals.
PDF
