A tumor cell specific Zona Pellucida glycoprotein 3 RNA transcript encodes an intracellular cancer antigen

BackgroundExpression of Zona Pellucida glycoprotein 3 (ZP3) in healthy tissue is restricted to the extracellular Zona Pellucida layer surrounding oocytes of ovarian follicles and to specific cells of the spermatogenic lineage. Ectopic expression of ZP3 has been observed in various types of cancer, rendering it a possible therapeutic target.MethodsTo support its validity as therapeutic target, we extended the cancer related data by investigating ZP3 expression using immunohistochemistry (IHC) of tumor biopsies. We performed a ZP3 transcript specific analysis of publicly available RNA-sequencing (RNA-seq) data of cancer cell lines (CCLs) and tumor and normal tissues, and validated expression data by independent computational analysis and real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR). A correlation between the ZP3 expression level and pathological and clinical parameters was also investigated.ResultsIHC data for several cancer types showed abundant ZP3 protein staining, which was confined to the cytoplasm, contradicting the extracellular protein localization in oocytes. We noticed that an alternative ZP3 RNA transcript, which we term ‘ZP3-Cancer’, was annotated in gene databases that lacks the genetic information encoding the N-terminal signal peptide that governs entry into the secretory pathway. This explains the intracellular localization of ZP3 in tumor cells. Analysis of publicly available RNA-seq data of 1339 cancer cell lines (CCLs), 10386 tumor tissues (The Cancer Genome Atlas) and 7481 healthy tissues (Genotype-Tissue Expression) indicated that ZP3-Cancer is the dominant ZP3 RNA transcript in tumor cells and is highly enriched in many cancer types, particularly in rectal, ovarian, colorectal, prostate, lung and breast cancer. Expression of ZP3-Cancer in tumor cells was confirmed by qPCR. Higher levels of the ZP3-Cancer transcript were associated with more aggressive tumors and worse survival of patients with various types of cancer.ConclusionThe cancer-restricted expression of ZP3-Cancer renders it an attractive tumor antigen for the development of a therapeutic cancer vaccine, particularly using mRNA expression technologies

Maintaining bone health by estrogen therapy in patients with advanced prostate cancer: a narrative review

The purpose of androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) in prostate cancer (PCa), using luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonists (LHRHa) or gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists, is to suppress the levels of testosterone. Since testosterone is the precursor of estradiol (E2), one of the major undesired effects of ADT is the concomitant loss of E2, causing among others an increased bone turnover and bone loss and an increased risk of osteoporosis and fractures. Therefore, the guidelines for ADT indicate to combine ADT routinely with bone-sparing agents such as bisphosphonates, denosumab or selective estrogen receptor modulators. However, these compounds may have side effects and some require inconvenient parenteral administration. Co-treatment with estrogens is an alternative approach to prevent bone loss and at the same time, to avoid other side effects caused by the loss of estrogens, which is the topic explored in the present narrative review. Estrogens investigated in PCa patients include parenteral or transdermal E2, diethylstilbestrol (DES), and ethinylestradiol (EE) as monotherapy, or high-dose estetrol (HDE4) combined with ADT. Cardiovascular adverse events have been reported with parenteral E2, DES and EE. Encouraging effects on bone parameters have been obtained with transdermal E2 (tE2) and HDE4, in the tE2 development program (PATCH study), and in the LHRHa/HDE4 co-treatment study (PCombi), respectively. Confirmation of the beneficial effects of estrogen therapy with tE2 or HDE4 on bone health in patients with advanced PCa is needed, with special emphasis on bone mass and fracture rate

Measuring quality of vision including negative dysphotopsia

PurposeTo adapt the Quality of Vision Questionnaire (QoV) for measuring negative dysphotopsia and to validate the original and modified versions in the Dutch population.MethodsThe QoV was translated into Dutch according to standardized methodology. Negative dysphotopsia items were constructed based on focus group interviews, literature review and clinical data. The questionnaire was completed by 404 subjects, including contact lens wearers, patients with cataract and after cataract surgery (95.5% with a monofocal, 4.5% with a multifocal intraocular lens). Rasch analysis was applied for evaluation of reliability and validity of the original QoV and modified version, Negative Dysphotopsia QoV (ND-QoV).ResultsThe frequency, severity and bothersome scales of the QoV and ND-QoV demonstrated good measurement precision, good fit statistics for all but one item, but significant mistargeting of more than one logit. Item estimations were stable across the study groups and scales were unidimensional with more than 50% of variance explained by the measurements. There was a positive correlation between questionnaire scores and best corrected visual acuity (r = 0.3, p < 0.01). The quality of vision measured by all three scales was significantly poorer (p < 0.01) in patients with negative dysphotopsia compared to asymptomatic pseudophakic patients.ConclusionThe Dutch version of the QoV questionnaire has shown good psychometric properties comparable to the native version as well as good reliability and validity. The addition of negative dysphotopsia items is a valuable modification for the reliable assessment of quality of vision in pseudophakic patients

Estetrol Prevents Hot Flushes and Improves Quality of Life in Patients with Advanced Prostate Cancer Treated with Androgen Deprivation Therapy: The PCombi Study

Background: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer (PCa) is accompanied by side effects affecting health-related quality of life (HRQL). Objective: To assess the effects of the fetal estrogen estetrol (E4) on symptoms related to estrogen and androgen deficiency, and on HRQL measured using the validated Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) questionnaire. Design, setting, and participants: This was a phase 2, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study in patients with advanced PCa. Intervention: Patients receiving ADT were randomly assigned at a 2:1 ratio to daily treatment with a high dose of E4 (HDE4; n = 41) or placebo (n = 21) for 24 wk. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: The primary outcome was the effect of HDE4 cotreatment on hot flushes (HFs). Secondary outcomes were the Q-Man questionnaire for evaluation of the effect on estrogen and androgen deficiency symptoms, and the FACT-P questionnaire for evaluating HRQL. Results and limitations: At 24 wk, the number of patients experiencing HFs was significantly lower in the HDE4 group than in the placebo group (14.3% vs 60.0%; p < 0.001). HDE4 treatment was associated with lower incidence of night sweats, arthralgia, and fatigue, but more nipple tenderness and gynecomastia. At 24 wk, the mean HRQL score favored HDE4 over placebo for the FACT-P total score (122.2 ± 12.3 vs 118.7 ± 19.7) and for several other FACT subscales. Conclusions: Daily HDE4 coadministration almost completely prevented HFs in patients with advanced PCa treated with ADT. HDE4 also had positive effects on HRQL and counteracted other estrogen deficiency symptoms caused by ADT. These data support the dual efficacy concept of ADT and HDE4 to improve HRQL and increase the antitumor effect of ADT. Patient summary: For patients on androgen deprivation therapy for advanced prostate cancer, cotreatment with a high dose of estetrol almost completely prevents the occurrence of hot flushes and improves quality of life and well-being, but nipple sensitivity and an increase in breast size may occur

Estetrol Cotreatment of Androgen Deprivation Therapy in Infiltrating or Metastatic, Castration-sensitive Prostate Cancer: A Randomized, Double-blind, Phase II Trial (PCombi)

Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists can be improved. To assess safety, the frequency and severity of hot flushes (HFs), bone health, and antitumor effects of high-dose estetrol (HDE4) when combined with ADT. A phase II, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study was conducted in advanced prostate cancer patients requiring ADT (the PCombi study). Patients receiving LHRH agonist treatment were randomized 2:1 to 40 mg HDE4 (n = 41) or placebo (n = 21) cotreatment for 24 wk. Coprimary endpoints were frequency/severity of HFs and levels of total and free testosterone (T). Secondary endpoints included assessments of bone metabolism (osteocalcin and type I collagen telopeptide [CTX1]), prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH). Efficacy analysis was based on the selected per-protocol (PP) population. Of 62 patients included in the study, 57 were suitable for a PP analysis (37 HDE4; 20 placebo). No E4-related serious cardiovascular adverse events occurred at 24 wk. Weekly HFs were reported by 13.5% of patients with HDE4 and 60.0% with placebo (p < 0.001). Daily HFs occurred in 5.9% versus 55%. Bone turnover parameters decreased significantly with HDE4 (p < 0.0001). Total and free T decreased earlier (p < 0.05), and free T was suppressed further (p < 0.05). PSA suppression was more profound and earlier (p < 0.005). FSH levels were suppressed by 98% versus 57% (p < 0.0001). Estrogenic side effects were nipple sensitivity (34%) and gynecomastia (17%). HDE4 cotreatment of ADT patients with advanced prostate cancer was well tolerated, and no treatment-related cardiovascular adverse events were observed at 24 wk. HFs and bone turnover were substantially reduced. Suppression of free T, PSA, and FSH was more rapid and profound, suggesting enhanced disease control by HDE4 cotreatment. Larger and longer-lasting studies are needed to confirm the results of the study reported here. Cotreatment of androgen deprivation therapy with high-dose estetrol in advanced prostate cancer patients results in fewer occurrences of hot flushes, bone protection, and other antitumor benefits. Nipple sensitivity and gynecomastia may occur as side effects. Androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists can be improved. Cotreatment of ADT with high-dose estetrol in advanced prostate cancer patients results in fewer occurrences of hot flushes, bone protection, and other antitumor benefits

Estetrol Cotreatment of Androgen Deprivation Therapy in Infiltrating or Metastatic, Castration-sensitive Prostate Cancer: A Randomized, Double-blind, Phase II Trial (PCombi)

Background: Androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for prostate cancer with luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonists can be improved. Objective: To assess safety, the frequency and severity of hot flushes (HFs), bone health, and antitumor effects of high-dose estetrol (HDE4) when combined with ADT. Design, setting and participants: A phase II, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study was conducted in advanced prostate cancer patients requiring ADT (the PCombi study). Intervention: Patients receiving LHRH agonist treatment were randomized 2:1 to 40 mg HDE4 (n = 41) or placebo (n = 21) cotreatment for 24 wk. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: Coprimary endpoints were frequency/severity of HFs and levels of total and free testosterone (T). Secondary endpoints included assessments of bone metabolism (osteocalcin and type I collagen telopeptide [CTX1]), prostate-specific antigen (PSA), and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH). Efficacy analysis was based on the selected per-protocol (PP) population. Results and limitations: Of 62 patients included in the study, 57 were suitable for a PP analysis (37 HDE4; 20 placebo). No E4-related serious cardiovascular adverse events occurred at 24 wk. Weekly HFs were reported by 13.5% of patients with HDE4 and 60.0% with placebo (p < 0.001). Daily HFs occurred in 5.9% versus 55%. Bone turnover parameters decreased significantly with HDE4 (p < 0.0001). Total and free T decreased earlier (p < 0.05), and free T was suppressed further (p < 0.05). PSA suppression was more profound and earlier (p < 0.005). FSH levels were suppressed by 98% versus 57% (p < 0.0001). Estrogenic side effects were nipple sensitivity (34%) and gynecomastia (17%). Conclusions: HDE4 cotreatment of ADT patients with advanced prostate cancer was well tolerated, and no treatment-related cardiovascular adverse events were observed at 24 wk. HFs and bone turnover were substantially reduced. Suppression of free T, PSA, and FSH was more rapid and profound, suggesting enhanced disease control by HDE4 cotreatment. Larger and longer-lasting studies are needed to confirm the results of the study reported here. Patient summary: Cotreatment of androgen deprivation therapy with high-dose estetrol in advanced prostate cancer patients results in fewer occurrences of hot flushes, bone protection, and other antitumor benefits. Nipple sensitivity and gynecomastia may occur as side effects