21 research outputs found

    Antimitotic drugs in the treatment of cancer

    Get PDF
    Cancer is a complex disease since it is adaptive in such a way that it can promote proliferation and invasion by means of an overactive cell cycle and in turn cellular division which is targeted by antimitotic drugs that are highly validated chemotherapy agents. However, antimitotic drug cytotoxicity to non-tumorigenic cells and multiple cancer resistance developed in response to drugs such as taxanes and vinca alkaloids are obstacles faced in both the clinical and basic research field to date. In this review, the classes of antimitotic compounds, their mechanisms of action and cancer cell resistance to chemotherapy and other limitations of current antimitotic compounds are highlighted, as well as the potential of novel 17-β estradiol analogs as cancer treatment.Medical Research Council of South Africa, the Research Committee of the Faculty of Health Sciences of the University of Pretoria, the Cancer association of South Africa and the National Research Foundation.http://link.springer.com/journal/280hb201

    Single-cell heterogeneity in ductal carcinoma in situ of breast.

    Get PDF
    Heterogeneous patterns of mutations and RNA expression have been well documented in invasive cancers. However, technological challenges have limited the ability to study heterogeneity of protein expression. This is particularly true for pre-invasive lesions such as ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Cell-level heterogeneity in ductal carcinoma in situ was analyzed in a single 5 μm tissue section using a multiplexed immunofluorescence analysis of 11 disease-related markers (EGFR, HER2, HER4, S6, pmTOR, CD44v6, SLC7A5 and CD10, CD4, CD8 and CD20, plus pan-cytokeratin, pan-cadherin, DAPI, and Na+K+ATPase for cell segmentation). Expression was quantified at cell level using a single-cell segmentation algorithm. K-means clustering was used to determine co-expression patterns of epithelial cell markers and immune markers. We document for the first time the presence of epithelial cell heterogeneity within ducts, between ducts and between patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. There was moderate heterogeneity in a distribution of eight clusters within each duct (average Shannon index 0.76; range 0-1.61). Furthermore, within each patient, the average Shannon index across all ducts ranged from 0.33 to 1.02 (s.d. 0.09-0.38). As the distribution of clusters within ducts was uneven, the analysis of eight ducts might be sufficient to represent all the clusters ie within- and between-duct heterogeneity. The pattern of epithelial cell clustering was associated with the presence and type of immune infiltrates, indicating a complex interaction between the epithelial tumor and immune system for each patient. This analysis also provides the first evidence that simultaneous analysis of both the epithelial and immune/stromal components might be necessary to understand the complex milieu in ductal carcinoma in situ lesions

    Single-cell heterogeneity in ductal carcinoma in situ of breast.

    No full text
    Heterogeneous patterns of mutations and RNA expression have been well documented in invasive cancers. However, technological challenges have limited the ability to study heterogeneity of protein expression. This is particularly true for pre-invasive lesions such as ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Cell-level heterogeneity in ductal carcinoma in situ was analyzed in a single 5 μm tissue section using a multiplexed immunofluorescence analysis of 11 disease-related markers (EGFR, HER2, HER4, S6, pmTOR, CD44v6, SLC7A5 and CD10, CD4, CD8 and CD20, plus pan-cytokeratin, pan-cadherin, DAPI, and Na+K+ATPase for cell segmentation). Expression was quantified at cell level using a single-cell segmentation algorithm. K-means clustering was used to determine co-expression patterns of epithelial cell markers and immune markers. We document for the first time the presence of epithelial cell heterogeneity within ducts, between ducts and between patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. There was moderate heterogeneity in a distribution of eight clusters within each duct (average Shannon index 0.76; range 0-1.61). Furthermore, within each patient, the average Shannon index across all ducts ranged from 0.33 to 1.02 (s.d. 0.09-0.38). As the distribution of clusters within ducts was uneven, the analysis of eight ducts might be sufficient to represent all the clusters ie within- and between-duct heterogeneity. The pattern of epithelial cell clustering was associated with the presence and type of immune infiltrates, indicating a complex interaction between the epithelial tumor and immune system for each patient. This analysis also provides the first evidence that simultaneous analysis of both the epithelial and immune/stromal components might be necessary to understand the complex milieu in ductal carcinoma in situ lesions

    Validation of the DNA damage immune response signature in patients with triple-negative breast cancer from the SWOG 9313c trial

    No full text
    PURPOSE:&nbsp;To independently validate two biomarkers, a 44-gene DNA damage immune response (DDIR) signature and stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (sTILs), as prognostic markers in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) treated with adjuvant doxorubicin (A) and cyclophosphamide (C) in SWOG 9313. METHODS:&nbsp;Four hundred twenty-five centrally determined patient cases with TNBC from S9313 were identified. DDIR signature was performed on RNA isolated from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor tissue, and samples were classified as DDIR negative or positive using predefined cutoffs. Evaluation of sTILs was performed as described previously. Markers were tested for prognostic value for disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) using Cox regression models adjusted for treatment assignment, nodal status, and tumor size. RESULTS:&nbsp;Among 425 patients with TNBC, 33% were node positive. DDIR was tested successfully in 90% of patients (381 of 425), 62% of which were DDIR signature positive. DDIR signature positivity was associated with improved DFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.67; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.92;&nbsp;P&nbsp;= .015) and OS (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.89;&nbsp;P&nbsp;= .010). sTILs density assessment was available in 99% of patients and was associated with improved DFS (HR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.96;&nbsp;P&nbsp;= .026 for sTILs density &ge; 20%&nbsp;v&nbsp;&lt; 20%) and OS (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.85;&nbsp;P&nbsp;= .004 for sTILs density &ge; 20%&nbsp;v&nbsp;&lt; 20%). DDIR signature score and sTILs density were moderately correlated (r&nbsp;= 0.60), which precluded statistical significance for DFS in a joint model. Three-year DFS and OS in a subgroup of patients with DDIR positivity and T1c/T2N0 disease were 88% and 94%, respectively. CONCLUSION:&nbsp;The prognostic role of sTILs and DDIR in early-stage TNBC was confirmed. DDIR signature conferred improved prognosis in two thirds of patients with TNBC treated with adjuvant AC. DDIR signature has the potential to stratify outcome and to identify patients with less projected benefit after AC chemotherapy.</p
    corecore