Regulation of breast cancer stem cell activity by signaling through the Notch4 receptor

The Notch receptor signalling pathway plays an important role in breast development, regulation of stem cells and differentiation of luminal progenitor cells. The pathway also plays a significant role in breast cancer development and progression. However, which of the Notch receptors that regulate breast cancer stem cells is unknown. We assessed stem cell activity in breast cancer cell lines and nine primary human tumour samples. In vitro and in vivo breast cancer stem cell activity was enriched using selection of anoikis resistant cells or cells expressing the membrane phenotype ESA(+)/CD44(+)/CD24(low). We compared the activation of Notch receptors in the breast cancer stem cell-enriched population to luminally differentiated cells and studied the effects of pathway inhibition, both in vitro and in vivo. We find that Notch4 signalling activity is 8-fold higher in the breast cancer stem cell-enriched cells compared to the differentiated cells while Notch1 activation is 4-fold lower in breast cancer stem cells. Furthermore, pharmacological or genetic Notch inhibition markedly reduced breast cancer stem cell activity in vitro, and significantly reduced tumour formation in vivo. Importantly, cells with Notch4 knock-down using specific shRNA formed fewer mammosphere colonies than Notch1 knock-down cells. In vivo Notch1 knock-down, like pharmacological inhibition, reduced the number and size of tumours but Notch4 knock-down suppressed tumour initiation completely. Our findings indicate that Notch4-targeted therapies will be more effective than targeting Notch1 in suppressing breast cancer recurrence initiated by breast cancer stem cells

Recruitment to the “Breast—Activity and Healthy Eating After Diagnosis” (B-AHEAD) Randomized Controlled Trial

Excess weight at breast cancer diagnosis and weight gain during treatment are linked to increased breast cancer specific and all-cause mortality. The Breast—Activity and Healthy Eating After Diagnosis (B-AHEAD) trial tested 2 weight loss diet and exercise programmes versus a control receiving standard written advice during adjuvant treatment. This article identifies differences in characteristics between patients recruited from the main trial site to those of the whole population from that site during the recruitment period and identifies barriers to recruitment. A total of 409 patients with operable breast cancer were recruited within 12 weeks of surgery. We compared demographic and treatment factors between women recruited from the main trial coordinating site (n = 300) to the whole breast cancer population in the center (n = 532). Uptake at the coordinating site was 42%, comparable to treatment trials in the unit (47%). Women recruited were younger (55.9 vs 61.2 years, P < .001), more likely to live in least deprived postcode areas (41.7% vs 31.6%, P = .004), and more likely to have screen-detected cancers (55.3% vs 48.7%, P = .026) than the whole breast cancer population. The good uptake highlights the interest in lifestyle change around the time of diagnosis, a challenging time in the patient pathway, and shows that recruitment at this time is feasible. Barriers to uptake among older women and women with a lower socioeconomic status should be understood and overcome in order to improve recruitment to future lifestyle intervention programs

FAK inhibition alone or in combination with adjuvant therapies reduces cancer stem cell activity

From Springer Nature via Jisc Publications RouterHistory: received 2020-06-29, accepted 2021-03-15, registration 2021-04-23, pub-electronic 2021-05-28, online 2021-05-28, collection 2021-12Publication status: PublishedFunder: Royal College of Surgeons of England (RCS); doi: https://doi.org/10.13039/501100000297Abstract: Cancer stem-like cells (CSC) contribute to therapy resistance and recurrence. Focal adhesion kinase (FAK) has a role in CSC regulation. We determined the effect of FAK inhibition on breast CSC activity alone and in combination with adjuvant therapies. FAK inhibition reduced CSC activity and self-renewal across all molecular subtypes in primary human breast cancer samples. Combined FAK and paclitaxel reduced self-renewal in triple negative cell lines. An invasive breast cancer cohort confirmed high FAK expression correlated with increased risk of recurrence and reduced survival. Co-expression of FAK and CSC markers was associated with the poorest prognosis, identifying a high-risk patient population. Combined FAK and paclitaxel treatment reduced tumour size, Ki67, ex-vivo mammospheres and ALDH+ expression in two triple negative patient derived Xenograft (PDX) models. Combined treatment reduced tumour initiation in a limiting dilution re-implantation PDX model. Combined FAK inhibition with adjuvant therapy has the potential to improve breast cancer survival

Breast-cancer adjuvant therapy with zoledronic acid

Background: Data suggest that the adjuvant use of bisphosphonates reduces rates of recurrence and death in patients with early-stage breast cancer. We conducted a study to determine whether treatment with zoledronic acid, in addition to standard adjuvant therapy, would improve disease outcomes in such patients. Methods: In this open-label phase 3 study, we randomly assigned 3360 patients to receive standard adjuvant systemic therapy either with or without zoledronic acid. The zoledronic acid was administered every 3 to 4 weeks for 6 doses and then every 3 to 6 months to complete 5 years of treatment. The primary end point of the study was disease-free survival. A second interim analysis revealed that a prespecified boundary for lack of benefit had been crossed. Results: At a median follow-up of 59 months, there was no significant between-group difference in the primary end point, with a rate of disease-free survival of 77% in each group (adjusted hazard ratio in the zoledronic acid group, 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.13; P=0.79). Disease recurrence or death occurred in 377 patients in the zoledronic acid group and 375 of those in the control group. The numbers of deaths — 243 in the zoledronic acid group and 276 in the control group — were also similar, resulting in rates of overall survival of 85.4% in the zoledronic acid group and 83.1% in the control group (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.01; P=0.07). In the zoledronic acid group, there were 17 confirmed cases of osteonecrosis of the jaw (cumulative incidence, 1.1%; 95% CI, 0.6 to 1.7; P<0.001) and 9 suspected cases; there were no cases in the control group. Rates of other adverse effects were similar in the two study groups. Conclusions: These findings do not support the routine use of zoledronic acid in the adjuvant management of breast cancer. (Funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals and the National Cancer Research Network; AZURE Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN79831382.

Rivaroxaban compared to no treatment in ER-negative stage I–III early breast cancer patients (the TIP Trial): study protocol for a phase II preoperative window-of-opportunity study design randomised controlled trial

From Springer Nature via Jisc Publications RouterHistory: received 2020-04-28, registration 2020-08-12, accepted 2020-08-12, pub-electronic 2020-08-27, online 2020-08-27, collection 2020-12Publication status: PublishedFunder: National Institute for Health Research; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100000272; Grant(s): NIHR CS-11-014Abstract: Background: Breast cancer patients are at a four-fold increased risk of developing a venous thromboembolism (VTE), a major cause of death in this group. Conversely, coagulation factors promote tumour growth and metastasis. This has been evidenced in preclinical models, with an inhibitory effect of anticoagulants on cancer growth through proliferative, angiogenic, apoptotic, cancer stem cell and metastatic processes. The extrinsic clotting pathway is also more upregulated in patients in the relatively poorer prognosis oestrogen receptor (ER)-negative breast cancer subgroup, with increased tumour stromal expression of the coagulation factors Tissue Factor and thrombin. Rivaroxaban (Xarelto®, Bayer AG, Leverkusen, Germany) is a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC). It is a Factor Xa inhibitor that is routinely prescribed for the prevention of stroke in non-valvular atrial fibrillation and for both VTE prophylaxis and treatment. This trial will assess the anti-proliferative and other anti-cancer progression mechanisms of Rivaroxaban in ER-negative early breast cancer patients. Methods: This UK-based preoperative window-of-opportunity phase II randomised control trial will randomise 88 treatment-naïve early breast cancer patients to receive 20 mg OD Rivaroxaban treatment for 11 to 17 days or no treatment. Treatment will be stopped 24 h (range 18–36 h) prior to surgery or repeat core biopsy. All patients will be followed up for 2 weeks following surgery or repeat core biopsy. The primary endpoint is change in tumour Ki67. Secondary outcome measures include tumour markers of apoptosis and angiogenesis, extrinsic clotting pathway activation and systemic markers of metastasis, tumour load and coagulation. Discussion: Laboratory evidence supports an anti-cancer role for anticoagulants; however, this has failed to translate into survival benefit when trialled in patients with metastatic disease or poor prognosis cancers, such as lung cancer. Subgroup analysis supported a potential survival benefit in better prognosis advanced disease patients. This is the first study to investigate the anti-cancer effects of anticoagulants in early breast cancer. Trial registration: UK National Research Ethics Service (NRES) approval 15/NW/0406, MHRA Clinical Trials Authorisation 48380/0003/001-0001. The sponsor is Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust, and the trial is co-ordinated by Cancer Research UK Liverpool Cancer Trials Unit (LCTU). EudraCT 2014-004909-33, registered 27 July 2015. ISRCTN14785273

Effect of a farnesyl transferase inhibitor (R115777) on ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast in a human xenograft model and on breast and ovarian cancer cell growth in vitro and in vivo

INTRODUCTION: The ras pathway is essential for cell growth and proliferation. The effects of R115777, a farnesyl transferase inhibitor, were investigated in cancer cell lines expressing varying levels of growth factor receptors and with differing ras status. Effects on tumour xenografts and human ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast in a xenograft mouse model were also tested. METHOD: In vitro, the concentrations required to reduce cell numbers by 50% (50% inhibitory concentration) were established (MDA-MB231, MCF-7, MCF-7/HER2-18, BT-474, SK-BR3 and SKOV3). Human DCIS was implanted in nude mice or, in separate experiments, cultured cells were injected (MDA-MB231, MCF-7/HER2-18, SKOV3) and allowed to form tumours. Proliferation and apoptosis were determined by immunohistochemistry in xenografts and cell tumours. RESULTS: The 50% inhibitory concentrations varied a hundred-fold, from 39 nmol/l (± 26 nmol/l) for SKBR3 to 5.9 μmol/l(± 0.8 μmol/l) for MDA-MB231. In MCF-7/HER2-18 and SKOV3 cells the levels of tumour growth inhibition were approximately 85% and 40%, respectively. There was a significant decrease in the cell turnover index (CTI; proliferation/apoptosis). In MDA-MB 231 with activated k-ras no inhibition was observed. In treated DCIS xenografts proliferation decreased and apoptosis increased. The CTI ratio between the start and 1 and 2 weeks of treatment were 1.99 and 1.50, respectively, for controls and 0.85 (P = 0.005) and 0.75 (P = 0.08) for treated xenografts. CONCLUSION: Treatment with the farnesyl transferase inhibitor reduced cell growth in vitro and cell tumour growth in vivo. In DCIS treatment resulted in a reduced CTI. R115777 is a promising treatment for breast cancer but the relation between effect and growth factor receptor and ras status has to be established

Anastrozole versus tamoxifen for the prevention of locoregional and contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ (IBIS-II DCIS): a double-blind, randomised controlled trial

Background Third-generation aromatase inhibitors are more effective than tamoxifen for preventing recurrence in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive invasive breast cancer. However, it is not known whether anastrozole is more effective than tamoxifen for women with hormone-receptor-positive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Here, we compare the efficacy of anastrozole with that of tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Methods In a double-blind, multicentre, randomised placebo-controlled trial, we recruited women who had been diagnosed with locally excised, hormone-receptor-positive DCIS. Eligible women were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio by central computer allocation to receive 1 mg oral anastrozole or 20 mg oral tamoxifen every day for 5 years. Randomisation was stratified by major centre or hub and was done in blocks (six, eight, or ten). All trial personnel, participants, and clinicians were masked to treatment allocation and only the trial statistician had access to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was all recurrence, including recurrent DCIS and new contralateral tumours. All analyses were done on a modified intention-to-treat basis (in all women who were randomised and did not revoke consent for their data to be included) and proportional hazard models were used to compute hazard ratios and corresponding confidence intervals. This trial is registered at the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN37546358. Results Between March 3, 2003, and Feb 8, 2012, we enrolled 2980 postmenopausal women from 236 centres in 14 countries and randomly assigned them to receive anastrozole (1449 analysed) or tamoxifen (1489 analysed). Median follow-up was 7·2 years (IQR 5·6–8·9), and 144 breast cancer recurrences were recorded. We noted no statistically significant difference in overall recurrence (67 recurrences for anastrozole vs 77 for tamoxifen; HR 0·89 [95% CI 0·64–1·23]). The non-inferiority of anastrozole was established (upper 95% CI <1·25), but its superiority to tamoxifen was not (p=0·49). A total of 69 deaths were recorded (33 for anastrozole vs 36 for tamoxifen; HR 0·93 [95% CI 0·58–1·50], p=0·78), and no specific cause was more common in one group than the other. The number of women reporting any adverse event was similar between anastrozole (1323 women, 91%) and tamoxifen (1379 women, 93%); the side-effect profiles of the two drugs differed, with more fractures, musculoskeletal events, hypercholesterolaemia, and strokes with anastrozole and more muscle spasm, gynaecological cancers and symptoms, vasomotor symptoms, and deep vein thromboses with tamoxifen. Conclusions No clear efficacy differences were seen between the two treatments. Anastrozole offers another treatment option for postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive DCIS, which may be be more appropriate for some women with contraindications for tamoxifen. Longer follow-up will be necessary to fully evaluate treatment differences