PARP inhibitors in BRCA1/BRCA2 germline mutation carriers with ovarian and breast cancer

BRCA and poly-ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) regulate pathways of DNA repair. Due to the accumulation of mutations introduced by error-prone DNA repair, breast and ovarian cancers develop in the setting of BRCA deficiency. A series of recent clinical trials has tested the use of PARP inhibition as a therapeutic strategy to target BRCA-deficient tumors

Identification of therapeutic targets applicable to clinical strategies in ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND: shRNA-mediated lethality screening is a useful tool to identify essential targets in cancer biology. Ovarian cancer (OC) is extremely heterogeneous and most cases are advanced stages at diagnosis. OC has a high response rate initially, but becomes resistant to standard chemotherapy. We previously employed high throughput global shRNA sensitization screens to identify NF-kB related pathways. Here, we re-analyzed our previous shRNA screens in an unbiased manner to identify clinically applicable molecular targets. METHODS: We proceeded with siRNA lethality screening using the top 55 genes in an expanded set of 6 OC cell lines. We investigated clinical relevance of candidate targets in The Cancer Genome Atlas OC dataset. To move these findings towards the clinic, we chose four pharmacological inhibitors to recapitulate the top siRNA effects: Oxozeaenol (for MAP3K7/TAK1), BI6727 (PLK1), MK1775 (WEE1), and Lapatinib (ERBB2). Cytotoxic effects were measured by cellular viability assay, as single agents and in 2-way combinations. Co-treatments were evaluated in either sequential or simultaneous exposure to drug for short term and extended periods to simulate different treatment strategies. RESULTS: Loss-of-function shRNA screens followed by short-term siRNA validation screens identified therapeutic targets in OC cells. Candidate genes were dysregulated in a subset of TCGA OCs although the alterations of these genes showed no statistical significance to overall survival. Pharmacological inhibitors such as Oxozeaenol, BI6727, and MK1775 showed cytotoxic effects in OC cells regardless of cisplatin responsiveness, while all OC cells tested were cytostatic to Lapatinib. Co-treatment with BI6727 and MK1775 at sub-lethal concentrations was equally potent to BI6727 alone at lethal concentrations without cellular re-growth after the drugs were washed off, suggesting the co-inhibition at reduced dosages may be more efficacious than maximal single-agent cytotoxic concentrations. CONCLUSIONS: Loss-of-function screen followed by in vitro target validation using chemical inhibitors identified clinically relevant targets. This approach has the potential to systematically refine therapeutic strategies in OC. These molecular target-driven strategies may provide additional therapeutic options for women whose tumors have become refractory to standard chemotherapy. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-016-2675-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

A Phase II Trial of AZD6244 (Selumetinib, ARRY-142886), an Oral MEK1/2 Inhibitor, in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma

AZD6244 is a MEK1/2 inhibitor with significant preclinical activity in multiple myeloma (MM) cells. This phase 2 study used a two-stage Simon design to determine the AZD6244 response rate in patients with relapsed or refractory MM

Tumour-elicited neutrophils engage mitochondrial metabolism to circumvent nutrient limitations and maintain immune suppression

Neutrophils are a vital component of immune protection, yet in cancer they may promote tumour progression, partly by generating reactive oxygen species (ROS) that disrupts lymphocyte functions. Metabolically, neutrophils are often discounted as purely glycolytic. Here we show that immature, c-Kit+ neutrophils subsets can engage in oxidative mitochondrial metabolism. With limited glucose supply, oxidative neutrophils use mitochondrial fatty acid oxidation to support NADPH oxidase-dependent ROS production. In 4T1 tumour-bearing mice, mitochondrial fitness is enhanced in splenic neutrophils and is driven by c-Kit signalling. Concordantly, tumour-elicited oxidative neutrophils are able to maintain ROS production and T cell suppression when glucose utilisation is restricted. Consistent with these findings, peripheral blood neutrophils from patients with cancer also display increased immaturity, mitochondrial content and oxidative phosphorylation. Together, our data suggest that the glucose-restricted tumour microenvironment induces metabolically adapted, oxidative neutrophils to maintain local immune suppression

Multirater Agreement of the Causes of Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction Failure

BackgroundAnterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction failure occurs in up to 10% of cases. Technical errors are considered the most common cause of graft failure despite the absence of validated studies. Limited data are available regarding the agreement among orthopaedic surgeons regarding the causes of primary ACL reconstruction failure and accuracy of graft tunnel placement.HypothesisExperienced knee surgeons have a high level of interobserver reliability in the agreement about the causes of primary ACL reconstruction failure, anatomic graft characteristics, and tunnel placement.Study designCohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3.MethodsTwenty cases of revision ACL reconstruction were randomly selected from the Multicenter ACL Revision Study (MARS) database. Each case included the patient's history, standardized radiographs, and a concise 30-second arthroscopic video taken at the time of revision demonstrating the graft remnant and location of the tunnel apertures. All 20 cases were reviewed by 10 MARS surgeons not involved with the primary surgery. Each surgeon completed a 2-part questionnaire dealing with each surgeon's training and practice, as well as the placement of the femoral and tibial tunnels, condition of the primary graft, and the surgeon's opinion as to the causes of graft failure. Interrater agreement was determined for each question with the kappa coefficient and the prevalence-adjusted, bias-adjusted kappa (PABAK).ResultsThe 10 reviewers have been in practice an average of 14 years and have performed at least 25 ACL reconstructions per year, and 9 were fellowship trained in sports medicine. There was wide variability in agreement among knee experts as to the specific causes of ACL graft failure. When participants were specifically asked about technical error as the cause for failure, interobserver agreement was only slight (PABAK = 0.26). There was fair overall agreement on ideal femoral tunnel placement (PABAK = 0.55) but only slight agreement on whether a femoral tunnel was too anterior (PABAK = 0.24) and fair agreement on whether it was too vertical (PABAK = 0.46). There was poor overall agreement for ideal tibial tunnel placement (PABAK = 0.17).ConclusionThis study suggests that more objective criteria are needed to accurately determine the causes of primary ACL graft failure as well as the ideal femoral and tibial tunnel placement in patients undergoing revision ACL reconstruction

Subsequent Surgery After Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: Rates and Risk Factors From a Multicenter Cohort

BackgroundWhile revision anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR) can be performed to restore knee stability and improve patient activity levels, outcomes after this surgery are reported to be inferior to those after primary ACLR. Further reoperations after revision ACLR can have an even more profound effect on patient satisfaction and outcomes. However, there is a current lack of information regarding the rate and risk factors for subsequent surgery after revision ACLR.PurposeTo report the rate of reoperations, procedures performed, and risk factors for a reoperation 2 years after revision ACLR.Study designCase-control study; Level of evidence, 3.MethodsA total of 1205 patients who underwent revision ACLR were enrolled in the Multicenter ACL Revision Study (MARS) between 2006 and 2011, composing the prospective cohort. Two-year questionnaire follow-up was obtained for 989 patients (82%), while telephone follow-up was obtained for 1112 patients (92%). If a patient reported having undergone subsequent surgery, operative reports detailing the subsequent procedure(s) were obtained and categorized. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to determine independent risk factors for a reoperation.ResultsOf the 1112 patients included in the analysis, 122 patients (11%) underwent a total of 172 subsequent procedures on the ipsilateral knee at 2-year follow-up. Of the reoperations, 27% were meniscal procedures (69% meniscectomy, 26% repair), 19% were subsequent revision ACLR, 17% were cartilage procedures (61% chondroplasty, 17% microfracture, 13% mosaicplasty), 11% were hardware removal, and 9% were procedures for arthrofibrosis. Multivariate analysis revealed that patients aged <20 years had twice the odds of patients aged 20 to 29 years to undergo a reoperation. The use of an allograft at the time of revision ACLR (odds ratio [OR], 1.79; P = .007) was a significant predictor for reoperations at 2 years, while staged revision (bone grafting of tunnels before revision ACLR) (OR, 1.93; P = .052) did not reach significance. Patients with grade 4 cartilage damage seen during revision ACLR were 78% less likely to undergo subsequent operations within 2 years. Sex, body mass index, smoking history, Marx activity score, technique for femoral tunnel placement, and meniscal tearing or meniscal treatment at the time of revision ACLR showed no significant effect on the reoperation rate.ConclusionThere was a significant reoperation rate after revision ACLR at 2 years (11%), with meniscal procedures most commonly involved. Independent risk factors for subsequent surgery on the ipsilateral knee included age <20 years and the use of allograft tissue at the time of revision ACLR

Effect of Graft Choice on the Outcome of Revision Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction in the Multicenter ACL Revision Study (MARS) Cohort

Most surgeons believe that graft choice for ACL reconstruction is an important factor related to outcome. Although graft choice may be limited in the revision setting based on previously used grafts, it is still felt to be important