9 research outputs found

    Markers of MEK inhibitor resistance in low-grade serous ovarian cancer: EGFR is a potential therapeutic target 11 Medical and Health Sciences 1112 Oncology and Carcinogenesis

    Get PDF
    Background: Although low-grade serous ovarian cancer (LGSC) is rare, case-fatality rates are high as most patients present with advanced disease and current cytotoxic therapies are not overly effective. Recognizing that these cancers may be driven by MAPK pathway activation, MEK inhibitors (MEKi) are being tested in clinical trials. LGSC respond to MEKi only in a subgroup of patients, so predictive biomarkers and better therapies will be needed. Methods: We evaluated a number of patient-derived LGSC cell lines, previously classified according to their MEKi sensitivity. Two cell lines were genomically compared against their matching tumors samples. MEKi-sensitive and MEKi-resistant lines were compared using whole exome sequencing and reverse phase protein array. Two treatment combinations targeting MEKi resistance markers were also evaluated using cell proliferation, cell viability, cell signaling, and drug synergism assays. Results: Low-grade serous ovarian cancer cell lines recapitulated the genomic aberrations from their matching tumor samples. We identified three potential predictive biomarkers that distinguish MEKi sensitive and resistant lines: KRAS mutation status, and EGFR and PKC-alpha protein expression. The biomarkers were validated in three newly developed LGSC cell lines. Sub-lethal combination of MEK and EGFR inhibition showed drug synergy and caused complete cell death in two of four MEKi-resistant cell lines tested. Conclusions: KRAS mutations and the protein expression of EGFR and PKC-alpha should be evaluated as predictive biomarkers in patients with LGSC treated with MEKi. Combination therapy using a MEKi with EGFR inhibition may represent a promising new therapy for patients with MEKi-resistant LGSC

    Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study

    Get PDF
    Funder: European Society of Intensive Care Medicine; doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/501100013347Funder: Flemish Society for Critical Care NursesAbstract: Purpose: Intensive care unit (ICU) patients are particularly susceptible to developing pressure injuries. Epidemiologic data is however unavailable. We aimed to provide an international picture of the extent of pressure injuries and factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries in adult ICU patients. Methods: International 1-day point-prevalence study; follow-up for outcome assessment until hospital discharge (maximum 12 weeks). Factors associated with ICU-acquired pressure injury and hospital mortality were assessed by generalised linear mixed-effects regression analysis. Results: Data from 13,254 patients in 1117 ICUs (90 countries) revealed 6747 pressure injuries; 3997 (59.2%) were ICU-acquired. Overall prevalence was 26.6% (95% confidence interval [CI] 25.9–27.3). ICU-acquired prevalence was 16.2% (95% CI 15.6–16.8). Sacrum (37%) and heels (19.5%) were most affected. Factors independently associated with ICU-acquired pressure injuries were older age, male sex, being underweight, emergency surgery, higher Simplified Acute Physiology Score II, Braden score 3 days, comorbidities (chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, immunodeficiency), organ support (renal replacement, mechanical ventilation on ICU admission), and being in a low or lower-middle income-economy. Gradually increasing associations with mortality were identified for increasing severity of pressure injury: stage I (odds ratio [OR] 1.5; 95% CI 1.2–1.8), stage II (OR 1.6; 95% CI 1.4–1.9), and stage III or worse (OR 2.8; 95% CI 2.3–3.3). Conclusion: Pressure injuries are common in adult ICU patients. ICU-acquired pressure injuries are associated with mainly intrinsic factors and mortality. Optimal care standards, increased awareness, appropriate resource allocation, and further research into optimal prevention are pivotal to tackle this important patient safety threat

    NOTCH signaling limits the response of Low Grade Serous Ovarian Cancers to MEK inhibition

    Get PDF
    Low-grade serous ovarian cancer (LGSOC) is a rare subtype of epithelial ovarian cancer with high fatality rates in advanced stages due to its chemo-resistant properties. LGSOC is characterized by activation of MAPK signaling and recent clinical trials indicate that the MEK inhibitor (MEKi) trametinib may be a good treatment option for a subset of patients. Understanding MEKi resistance mechanisms and subsequent identification of rational drug combinations to suppress resistance may greatly improve LGSOC treatment strategies. Both gain-of-function and loss-of-function CRISPR-Cas9 genome-wide libraries were used to screen LGSOC cell lines to identify genes that modulate the response to MEKi. Overexpression of MAML2 and loss of MAP3K1 were identified, both leading to overexpression of the NOTCH target HES1, which has a causal role in this process as its knockdown reversed MEKi resistance. Interestingly, increased HES1 expression was also observed in selected spontaneous trametinib resistant clones, next to activating MAP2K1 (MEK1) mutations. Subsequent trametinib synthetic lethality screens identified SHOC2 downregulation as being synthetic lethal with MEKi. Targeting SHOC2 with pan-RAF inhibitors (pan-RAFi) in combination with MEKi was effective in parental LGSOC cell lines, in MEKi resistant derivatives, in primary ascites cultures from LGSOC patients and in LGSOC (cell line derived and patient-derived) xenograft mouse models. We found that the combination of pan-RAFi with MEKi downregulated HES1 levels in trametinib resistant cells, providing an explanation for the synergy that was observed. Combining MEKi with pan-RAFi may provide a promising treatment strategy for LGSOC patients, which warrants further clinical validation

    Correction to: Prevalence, associated factors and outcomes of pressure injuries in adult intensive care unit patients: the DecubICUs study (Intensive Care Medicine, (2021), 47, 2, (160-169), 10.1007/s00134-020-06234-9)

    No full text
    The original version of this article unfortunately contained a mistake. The members of the ESICM Trials Group Collaborators were not shown in the article but only in the ESM. The full list of collaborators is shown below. The original article has been corrected
    corecore