Adding 6 months of androgen deprivation therapy to postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a comparison of short-course versus no androgen deprivation therapy in the RADICALS-HD randomised controlled trial

Background Previous evidence indicates that adjuvant, short-course androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) improves metastasis-free survival when given with primary radiotherapy for intermediate-risk and high-risk localised prostate cancer. However, the value of ADT with postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy is unclear. Methods RADICALS-HD was an international randomised controlled trial to test the efficacy of ADT used in combination with postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer. Key eligibility criteria were indication for radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen less than 5 ng/mL, absence of metastatic disease, and written consent. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to radiotherapy alone (no ADT) or radiotherapy with 6 months of ADT (short-course ADT), using monthly subcutaneous gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue injections, daily oral bicalutamide monotherapy 150 mg, or monthly subcutaneous degarelix. Randomisation was done centrally through minimisation with a random element, stratified by Gleason score, positive margins, radiotherapy timing, planned radiotherapy schedule, and planned type of ADT, in a computerised system. The allocated treatment was not masked. The primary outcome measure was metastasis-free survival, defined as distant metastasis arising from prostate cancer or death from any cause. Standard survival analysis methods were used, accounting for randomisation stratification factors. The trial had 80% power with two-sided α of 5% to detect an absolute increase in 10-year metastasis-free survival from 80% to 86% (hazard ratio [HR] 0·67). Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN40814031, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00541047. Findings Between Nov 22, 2007, and June 29, 2015, 1480 patients (median age 66 years [IQR 61–69]) were randomly assigned to receive no ADT (n=737) or short-course ADT (n=743) in addition to postoperative radiotherapy at 121 centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. With a median follow-up of 9·0 years (IQR 7·1–10·1), metastasis-free survival events were reported for 268 participants (142 in the no ADT group and 126 in the short-course ADT group; HR 0·886 [95% CI 0·688–1·140], p=0·35). 10-year metastasis-free survival was 79·2% (95% CI 75·4–82·5) in the no ADT group and 80·4% (76·6–83·6) in the short-course ADT group. Toxicity of grade 3 or higher was reported for 121 (17%) of 737 participants in the no ADT group and 100 (14%) of 743 in the short-course ADT group (p=0·15), with no treatment-related deaths. Interpretation Metastatic disease is uncommon following postoperative bed radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy. Adding 6 months of ADT to this radiotherapy did not improve metastasis-free survival compared with no ADT. These findings do not support the use of short-course ADT with postoperative radiotherapy in this patient population

Duration of androgen deprivation therapy with postoperative radiotherapy for prostate cancer: a comparison of long-course versus short-course androgen deprivation therapy in the RADICALS-HD randomised trial

Background Previous evidence supports androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) with primary radiotherapy as initial treatment for intermediate-risk and high-risk localised prostate cancer. However, the use and optimal duration of ADT with postoperative radiotherapy after radical prostatectomy remains uncertain. Methods RADICALS-HD was a randomised controlled trial of ADT duration within the RADICALS protocol. Here, we report on the comparison of short-course versus long-course ADT. Key eligibility criteria were indication for radiotherapy after previous radical prostatectomy for prostate cancer, prostate-specific antigen less than 5 ng/mL, absence of metastatic disease, and written consent. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to add 6 months of ADT (short-course ADT) or 24 months of ADT (long-course ADT) to radiotherapy, using subcutaneous gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogue (monthly in the short-course ADT group and 3-monthly in the long-course ADT group), daily oral bicalutamide monotherapy 150 mg, or monthly subcutaneous degarelix. Randomisation was done centrally through minimisation with a random element, stratified by Gleason score, positive margins, radiotherapy timing, planned radiotherapy schedule, and planned type of ADT, in a computerised system. The allocated treatment was not masked. The primary outcome measure was metastasis-free survival, defined as metastasis arising from prostate cancer or death from any cause. The comparison had more than 80% power with two-sided α of 5% to detect an absolute increase in 10-year metastasis-free survival from 75% to 81% (hazard ratio [HR] 0·72). Standard time-to-event analyses were used. Analyses followed intention-to-treat principle. The trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN40814031, and ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT00541047 . Findings Between Jan 30, 2008, and July 7, 2015, 1523 patients (median age 65 years, IQR 60–69) were randomly assigned to receive short-course ADT (n=761) or long-course ADT (n=762) in addition to postoperative radiotherapy at 138 centres in Canada, Denmark, Ireland, and the UK. With a median follow-up of 8·9 years (7·0–10·0), 313 metastasis-free survival events were reported overall (174 in the short-course ADT group and 139 in the long-course ADT group; HR 0·773 [95% CI 0·612–0·975]; p=0·029). 10-year metastasis-free survival was 71·9% (95% CI 67·6–75·7) in the short-course ADT group and 78·1% (74·2–81·5) in the long-course ADT group. Toxicity of grade 3 or higher was reported for 105 (14%) of 753 participants in the short-course ADT group and 142 (19%) of 757 participants in the long-course ADT group (p=0·025), with no treatment-related deaths. Interpretation Compared with adding 6 months of ADT, adding 24 months of ADT improved metastasis-free survival in people receiving postoperative radiotherapy. For individuals who can accept the additional duration of adverse effects, long-course ADT should be offered with postoperative radiotherapy. Funding Cancer Research UK, UK Research and Innovation (formerly Medical Research Council), and Canadian Cancer Society

Tumor Microenvironment as a Therapeutic Target in Melanoma Treatment

The role of the tumor microenvironment in tumor growth and therapy has recently attracted more attention in research and drug development. The ability of the microenvironment to trigger tumor maintenance, progression, and resistance is the main cause for treatment failure and tumor relapse. Accumulated evidence indicates that the maintenance and progression of tumor cells is determined by components of the microenvironment, which include stromal cells (endothelial cells, fibroblasts, mesenchymal stem cells, and immune cells), extracellular matrix (ECM), and soluble molecules (chemokines, cytokines, growth factors, and extracellular vesicles). As a solid tumor, melanoma is not only a tumor mass of monolithic tumor cells, but it also contains supporting stroma, ECM, and soluble molecules. Melanoma cells are continuously in interaction with the components of the microenvironment. In the present review, we focus on the role of the tumor microenvironment components in the modulation of tumor progression and treatment resistance as well as the impact of the tumor microenvironment as a therapeutic target in melanoma

Tumor necrosis factor-α triggers opposing signals in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma and induces apoptosis via mitochondrial- and non-mitochondrial-dependent pathways

Head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) remains one of the most common malignancies worldwide. Although the treatment outcomes of HNSCC have improved in recent years, the prognosis of patients with advanced-stage disease remains poor. Current treatment strategies for HNSCC include surgery as a primary therapy, while radio-, chemo-, and biotherapeutics can be applied as second-line therapy. Although tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) is a potent tumor suppressor cytokine, the stimulation of opposing signals impairs its clinical utility as an anticancer agent. The aim of this study was to elucidate the mechanisms regulating TNF-α‑induced opposing signals and their biological consequences in HNSCC cell lines. We determined the molecular mechanisms of TNF-α-induced opposing signals in HNSCC cells. Our in vitro analysis indicated that one of these signals triggers apoptosis, while the other induces both apoptosis and cell survival. The TNF-α-induced survival of HNSCC cells is mediated by the TNF receptor-associated factor 2 (TRAF2)/nuclear factor (NF)-κB-dependent pathway, while TNF-α-induced apoptosis is mediated by mitochondrial and non-mitochondrial-dependent mechanisms through FADD-caspase-8-caspase-3 and ASK-JNK-p53-Noxa pathways. The localization of Noxa protein to both the mitochondria and endoplasmic reticulum (ER) was found to cause mitochondrial dysregulation and ER stress, respectively. Using inhibitory experiments, we demonstrated that the FADD‑caspase-8‑caspase-3 pathway, together with mitochondrial dysregulation and ER stress-dependent pathways, are essential for the modulation of apoptosis, and the NF-κB pathway is essential for the modulation of anti-apoptotic effects/cell survival during the exposure of HNSCC cells to TNF-α. Our data provide insight into the mechanisms of TNF-α-induced opposing signals in HNSCC cells and may further help in the development of novel therapeutic approaches with which to minimize the systemic toxicity of TNF-α

Cancer stem cell as therapeutic target for melanoma treatment

Human malignant melanoma is a highly aggressive skin tumor that is characterized by its extraordinary heterogeneity, propensity for dissemination to distant organs and resistance to cytotoxic agents. Although chemo- and immune-based therapies have been evaluated in clinical trials, most of these therapeutics do not show significant benefit for patients with advanced disease. Treatment failure in melanoma patients is attributed mainly to the development of tumor heterogeneity resulting from the formation of genetically divergent subpopulations. These subpopulations are composed of cancer stem-like cells (CSCs) as a small fraction and non-cancer stem cells that form the majority of the tumor mass. In recent years, CSCs gained more attention and suggested as valuable experimental model system for tumor study. In melanoma, intratumoral heterogeneity, progression and drug resistance result from the unique characteristics of melanoma stem cells (MSCs). These MSCs are characterized by their distinct protein signature and tumor growth-driving pathways, whose activation is mediated by driver mutation-dependent signal. The molecular features of MSCs are either in a causal or consequential relationship to melanoma progression, drug resistance and relapse. Here, we review the current scientific evidence that supports CSC hypothesis and the validity of MSCs-dependent pathways and their key molecules as potential therapeutic target for melanoma treatment

MEF2B is a member of the BCL6 gene transcriptional complex and induces its expression in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma of the germinal center B-cell-like type

Myocyte enhancer-binding factor 2B (MEF2B) has been implicated as a transcriptional regulator for BCL6. However, details about the interaction between MEF2B and BCL6 during expression, as well as the relationship of MEF2B to the expression of other germinal center (GC) markers, have not yet been fully explained. Using germinal center B-cell-like diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (GC-DLBCL) and activated B-cell diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (ABC-DLBCL) cell lines, we analyzed the expression of MEF2B and its associations with BCL6, CD10, and ERK. Furthermore, small interfering RNA (siRNA) was used to study the possible effects of MEF2B knockdown on these proteins and cell growth. Analysis of the BCL6 transcriptional complex was performed using electrophoretic mobility shift assay. The correlation between MEF2B expression and the genetic type of DLBCL was assessed using immunohistochemistry on 111 patient samples, and via in silico analysis of publicly available microarray (Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO)) datasets. Our results indicate that the expression of MEF2B protein is important for the growth of GC-DLBCL cells, as evidenced by MEF2B knockdown inhibition of cell growth and the subsequent suppression of BCL6, CD10, and ERK phosphorylation. Analysis of BCL6 transcription factors in nuclear extracts of MEF2-expressing DLBCL cells showed involvement of MEF2B with AP-2 alpha and BCL6 proteins in the formation of the BCL6 gene transcriptional complex. Indeed, differential expression of MEF2B in the GC-DLBCL is statistically significant compared to the ABC-DLBCL in the GEO datasets, as well as in tissue microarray, as indicated via immunohistochemistry (Visco-Young algorithm). Our findings indicate that MEF2B is an essential component of the BCL6 gene transcriptional complex for the regulation of DLBCL growth via the promotion of BCL6 expression. Beyond its regulatory role in DLBCL growth, MEF2B expression correlated positively with BCL6 and CD10 expression, and was preferentially expressed in the GBC-DLBCL group