The Protein Kinase C Inhibitor Enzastaurin Exhibits Antitumor Activity against Uveal Melanoma

GNAQ mutations at codon 209 have been recently identified in approximately 50% of uveal melanomas (UM) and are reported to be oncogenic through activating the MAPK/Erk1/2 pathway. Protein kinase C (PKC) is a component of signaling from GNAQ to Erk1/2. Inhibition of PKC might regulate GNAQ mutation-induced Erk1/2 activation, resulting in growth inhibition of UM cells carrying GNAQ mutations. UM cells carrying wild type or mutant GNAQ were treated with the PKC inhibitor enzastaurin. Effects on proliferation, apoptosis, and signaling events were evaluated. Enzastaurin downregulated the expression of several PKC isoforms including PKCβII PKCθ, PKCε and/or their phosphorylation in GNAQ mutated cells. Downregulation of these PKC isoforms in GNAQ mutated cells by shRNA resulted in reduced viability. Enzastaurin exhibited greater antiproliferative effect on GNAQ mutant cells than wild type cells through induction of G1 arrest and apoptosis. Enzastaurin-induced G1 arrest was associated with inhibition of Erk1/2 phosphorylation, downregulation of cyclin D1, and accumulation of cyclin dependent kinase inhibitor p27Kip1. Furthermore, enzastaurin reduced the expression of antiapoptotic Bcl-2 and survivin in GNAQ mutant cells. Inhibition of Erk1/2 phosphorylation with a MEK specific inhibitor enhanced the sensitivity of GNAQ wild type cells to enzastaurin, accompanied by p27Kip1 accumulation and/or inhibition of enzastaurin-induced survivin and Bcl-2 upregulation. PKC inhibitors such as enzastaurin have activity against UM cells carrying GNAQ mutations through inhibition of the PKC/Erk1/2 pathway and induction of G1 arrest and apoptosis. Inhibition of the PKC pathway provides a basis for clinical investigation in patients with UM

Bone mineral density in breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant letrozole, tamoxifen, or sequences of letrozole and tamoxifen in the BIG 1-98 study (SAKK 21/07)

Background: The risk of osteoporosis and fracture influences the selection of adjuvant endocrine therapy. We analyzed bone mineral density (BMD) in Swiss patients of the Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 trial [treatment arms: A, tamoxifen (T) for 5 years; B, letrozole (L) for 5 years; C, 2 years of T followed by 3 years of L; D, 2 years of L followed by 3 years of T]. Patients and methods: Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) results were retrospectively collected. Patients without DXA served as control group. Repeated measures models using covariance structures allowing for different times between DXA were used to estimate changes in BMD. Prospectively defined covariates were considered as fixed effects in the multivariable models. Results: Two hundred and sixty-one of 546 patients had one or more DXA with 577 lumbar and 550 hip measurements. Weight, height, prior hormone replacement therapy, and hysterectomy were positively correlated with BMD; the correlation was negative for letrozole arms (B/C/D versus A), known osteoporosis, time on trial, age, chemotherapy, and smoking. Treatment did not influence the occurrence of osteoporosis (T score < −2.5 standard deviation). Conclusions: All aromatase inhibitor regimens reduced BMD. The sequential schedules were as detrimental for bone density as L monotherap

Outcomes of special histotypes of breast cancer after adjuvant endocrine therapy with letrozole or tamoxifen in the monotherapy cohort of the BIG 1-98 trial

In the BIG 1-98 clinical trial of 4922 postmenopausal women treated with 5 years of letrozole or tamoxifen for endocrine-responsive breast cancer, 183 had the rare histotypes mucinous or tubular/cribriform. These women had better outcomes than those with other histotypes. The magnitude of the letrozole advantage compared with tamoxifen may not be as large in patients with these rare histotype

Adverse prognostic value of peritumoral vascular invasion: is it abrogated by adequate endocrine adjuvant therapy? Results from two International Breast Cancer Study Group randomized trials of chemoendocrine adjuvant therapy for early breast cancer

Background: Peritumoral vascular invasion (PVI) may assist in assigning optimal adjuvant systemic therapy for women with early breast cancer. Patients and methods: Patients participated in two International Breast Cancer Study Group randomized trials testing chemoendocrine adjuvant therapies in premenopausal (trial VIII) or postmenopausal (trial IX) node-negative breast cancer. PVI was assessed by institutional pathologists and/or central review on hematoxylin-eosin-stained slides in 99% of patients (analysis cohort 2754 patients, median follow-up >9 years). Results: PVI, present in 23% of the tumors, was associated with higher grade tumors and larger tumor size (trial IX only). Presence of PVI increased locoregional and distant recurrence and was significantly associated with poorer disease-free survival. The adverse prognostic impact of PVI in trial VIII was limited to premenopausal patients with endocrine-responsive tumors randomized to therapies not containing goserelin, and conversely the beneficial effect of goserelin was limited to patients whose tumors showed PVI. In trial IX, all patients received tamoxifen: the adverse prognostic impact of PVI was limited to patients with receptor-negative tumors regardless of chemotherapy. Conclusion: Adequate endocrine adjuvant therapy appears to abrogate the adverse impact of PVI in node-negative disease, while PVI may identify patients who will benefit particularly from adjuvant therap

Adverse prognostic value of peritumoral vascular invasion: is it abrogated by adequate endocrine adjuvant therapy? Results from two International Breast Cancer Study Group randomized trials of chemoendocrine adjuvant therapy for early breast cancer

Background: Peritumoral vascular invasion (PVI) may assist in assigning optimal adjuvant systemic therapy for women with early breast cancer. Patients and methods: Patients participated in two International Breast Cancer Study Group randomized trials testing chemoendocrine adjuvant therapies in premenopausal (trial VIII) or postmenopausal (trial IX) node-negative breast cancer. PVI was assessed by institutional pathologists and/or central review on hematoxylin-eosin-stained slides in 99% of patients (analysis cohort 2754 patients, median follow-up >9 years). Results: PVI, present in 23% of the tumors, was associated with higher grade tumors and larger tumor size (trial IX only). Presence of PVI increased locoregional and distant recurrence and was significantly associated with poorer disease-free survival. The adverse prognostic impact of PVI in trial VIII was limited to premenopausal patients with endocrine-responsive tumors randomized to therapies not containing goserelin, and conversely the beneficial effect of goserelin was limited to patients whose tumors showed PVI. In trial IX, all patients received tamoxifen: the adverse prognostic impact of PVI was limited to patients with receptor-negative tumors regardless of chemotherapy. Conclusion: Adequate endocrine adjuvant therapy appears to abrogate the adverse impact of PVI in node-negative disease, while PVI may identify patients who will benefit particularly from adjuvant therap

Interpreting breast international group (BIG) 1-98: a randomized, double-blind, phase III trial comparing letrozole and tamoxifen as adjuvant endocrine therapy for postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, early breast cancer

The Breast International Group (BIG) 1-98 study is a four-arm trial comparing 5 years of monotherapy with tamoxifen or with letrozole or with sequences of 2 years of one followed by 3 years of the other for postmenopausal women with endocrine-responsive early invasive breast cancer. From 1998 to 2003, BIG -98 enrolled 8,010 women. The enhanced design f the trial enabled two complementary analyses of efficacy and safety. Collection of tumor specimens further enabled treatment comparisons based on tumor biology. Reports of BIG 1-98 should be interpreted in relation to each individual patient as she weighs the costs and benefits of available treatments

Differences between the non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors anastrozole and letrozole – of clinical importance?

Aromatase inhibition is the gold standard for treatment of early and advanced breast cancer in postmenopausal women suffering from an estrogen receptor-positive disease. The currently established group of anti-aromatase compounds comprises two reversible aromatase inhibitors (anastrozole and letrozole) and on the other hand, the irreversible aromatase inactivator exemestane. Although exemestane is the only widely used aromatase inactivator at this stage, physicians very often have to choose between either anastrozole or letrozole in general practice. These third-generation aromatase inhibitors (letrozole/Femara (Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Basel, Switzerland) and anastrozole/Arimidex (AstraZeneca, Pharmaceuticals, Macclesfield, Cheshire, UK)), have recently demonstrated superior efficacy compared with tamoxifen as initial therapy for early breast cancer improving disease-free survival. However, although anastrozole and letrozole belong to the same pharmacological class of agents (triazoles), an increasing body of evidence suggests that these aromatase inhibitors are not equipotent when given in the clinically established doses. Preclinical and clinical evidence indicates distinct pharmacological profiles. Thus, this review focuses on the differences between the non-steroidal aromatase inhibitors allowing physicians to choose between these compounds based on scientific evidence. Although we are waiting for the important results of a still ongoing head-to-head comparison in patients with early breast cancer at high risk for relapse (Femara Anastrozole Clinical Evaluation trial; ‘FACE-trial'), clinicians have to make their choices today. On the basis of available evidence summarised here and until FACE-data become available, letrozole seems to be the best choice for the majority of breast cancer patients whenever a non-steroidal aromatase inhibitor has to be chosen in a clinical setting. The background for this recommendation is discussed in the following chapters

Imatinib for Melanomas Harboring Mutationally Activated or Amplified KIT Arising on Mucosal, Acral, and Chronically Sun-Damaged Skin

Amplifications and mutations in the KIT proto-oncogene in subsets of melanomas provide therapeutic opportunities