Cactus pear: a natural product in cancer chemoprevention

BACKGROUND: Cancer chemoprevention is a new approach in cancer prevention, in which chemical agents are used to prevent cancer in normal and/or high-risk populations. Although chemoprevention has shown promise in some epithelial cancers, currently available preventive agents are limited and the agents are costly, generally with side effects. Natural products, such as grape seed, green tea, and certain herbs have demonstrated anti-cancer effects. To find a natural product that can be used in chemoprevention of cancer, we tested Arizona cactus fruit solution, the aqueous extracts of cactus pear, for its anti-cancer effects in cultured cells and in an animal model. METHOD: Aqueous extracts of cactus pear were used to treat immortalized ovarian and cervical epithelial cells, as well as ovarian, cervical, and bladder cancer cells. Aqueous extracts of cactus pear were used at six concentrations (0, 0.5, 1, 5, 10 or 25%) to treat cells for 1, 3, or 5 days. Growth inhibition, apoptosis induction, and cell cycle changes were analyzed in the cultured cells; the suppression of tumor growth in nude mice was evaluated and compared with the effect of a synthetic retinoid N-(4-hydroxyphernyl) retinamide (4-HPR), which is currently used as a chemoprevention agent. Immunohistochemistry staining of tissue samples from animal tumors was performed to examine the gene expression. RESULTS: Cells exposed to cactus pear extracts had a significant increase in apoptosis and growth inhibition in both immortalized epithelial cells and cancer cells in a dose- and time-dependent manner. It also affected cell cycle of cancer cells by increasing G1 and decreasing G2 and S phases. Both 4-HPR and cactus pear extracts significantly suppressed tumor growth in nude mice, increased annexin IV expression, and decreased VEGF expression. CONCLUSION: Arizona cactus pear extracts effectively inhibited cell growth in several different immortalized and cancer cell cultures, suppressed tumor growth in nude mice, and modulated expression of tumor-related genes. These effects were comparable with those caused by a synthetic retinoid currently used in chemoprevention trials. The mechanism of the anti-cancer effects of cactus pear extracts needs to be further studied

The Role of Quantitative Pharmacology in an Academic Translational Research Environment

Translational research is generally described as the application of basic science discoveries to the treatment or prevention of disease or injury. Its value is usually determined based on the likelihood that exploratory or developmental research can yield effective therapies. While the pharmaceutical industry has evolved into a highly specialized sector engaged in translational research, the academic medical research community has similarly embraced this paradigm largely through the motivation of the National Institute of Health (NIH) via its Roadmap initiative. The Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) has created opportunities for institutions which can provide the multidisciplinary environment required to engage such research. A key component of the CTSA and an element of both the NIH Roadmap and the FDA Critical Path is the bridging of bench and bedside science via quantitative pharmacologic relationships. The infrastructure of the University of Pennsylvania/Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia CTSA is highlighted relative to both research and educational objectives reliant upon quantitative pharmacology. A case study, NIH-sponsored research program exploring NK1r antagonism for the treatment NeuroAIDS is used to illustrate the application of quantitative pharmacology in a translational research paradigm

Minimal residual disease in Myeloma: Application for clinical care and new drug registration

The development of novel agents has transformed the treatment paradigm for multiple myeloma, with minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity now achievable across the entire disease spectrum. Bone marrow–based technologies to assess MRD, including approaches using next-generation flow and next-generation sequencing, have provided real-time clinical tools for the sensitive detection and monitoring of MRD in patients with multiple myeloma. Complementary liquid biopsy–based assays are now quickly progressing with some, such as mass spectrometry methods, being very close to clinical use, while others utilizing nucleic acid–based technologies are still developing and will prove important to further our understanding of the biology of MRD. On the regulatory front, multiple retrospective individual patient and clinical trial level meta-analyses have already shown and will continue to assess the potential of MRD as a surrogate for patient outcome. Given all this progress, it is not surprising that a number of clinicians are now considering using MRD to inform real-world clinical care of patients across the spectrum from smoldering myeloma to relapsed refractory multiple myeloma, with each disease setting presenting key challenges and questions that will need to be addressed through clinical trials. The pace of advances in targeted and immune therapies in multiple myeloma is unprecedented, and novel MRD-driven biomarker strategies are essential to accelerate innovative clinical trials leading to regulatory approval of novel treatments and continued improvement in patient outcomes

An Accurate Definition of the Status of Inactive Hepatitis B Virus Carrier by a Combination of Biomarkers (FibroTest-ActiTest) and Viral Load

BACKGROUND: The combination of transaminases (ALT), biopsy, HBeAg and viral load have classically defined the inactive status of carriers of chronic hepatitis B. The use of FibroTest (FT) and ActiTest (AT), biomarkers of fibrosis and necroinflammatory activity, has been previously validated as alternatives to biopsy. We compared the 4-year prognostic value of combining FT-AT and viral load for a better definition of the inactive carrier status. METHODS AND FINDINGS: 1,300 consecutive CHB patients who had been prospectively followed since 2001 were pre-included. The main endpoint was the absence of liver-related complications, transplantation or death. We used the manufacturers' definitions of normal FT (< = 0.27), normal AT (< = 0.29) and 3 standard classes for viral load. The adjustment factors were age, sex, HBeAg, ethnic origin, alcohol consumption, HIV-Delta-HCV co-infections and treatment. RESULTS: 1,074 patients with baseline FT-AT and viral load were included: 41 years old, 47% African, 27% Asian, 26% Caucasian. At 4 years follow-up, 50 complications occurred (survival without complications 93.4%), 36 deaths occurred (survival 95.0%), including 27 related to HBV (survival 96.1%). The prognostic value of FT was higher than those of viral load or ALT when compared using area under the ROC curves [0.89 (95%CI 0.84-0.93) vs 0.64 (0.55-0.71) vs 0.53 (0.46-0.60) all P<0.001], survival curves and multivariate Cox model [regression coefficient 5.2 (3.5-6.9; P<0.001) vs 0.53 (0.15-0.92; P = 0.007) vs -0.001 (-0.003-0.000;P = 0.052)] respectively. A new definition of inactive carriers was proposed with an algorithm combining "zero" scores for FT-AT (F0 and A0) and viral load classes. This new algorithm provides a 100% negative predictive value for the prediction of liver related complications or death. Among the 275 patients with the classic definition of inactive carrier, 62 (23%) had fibrosis presumed with FT, and 3 died or had complications at 4 year. CONCLUSION: In patients with chronic hepatitis B, a combination of FibroTest-ActiTest and viral load testing accurately defined the prognosis and the inactive carrier status

Collaborating to Compete: Blood Profiling Atlas in Cancer (BloodPAC) Consortium

Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/136731/1/cpt666.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/136731/2/cpt666_am.pd

Postal survey of physicians and laboratories: Practices and perceptions of molecular oncology testing

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Molecular oncology testing (MOT) to detect genomic alterations underlying cancer holds promise for improved cancer care. Yet knowledge limitations regarding the delivery of testing services may constrain the translation of scientific advancements into effective health care.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We conducted a cross-sectional, self-administered, postal survey of active cancer physicians in Ontario, Canada (N = 611) likely to order MOT, and cancer laboratories (N = 99) likely to refer (i.e., referring laboratories) or conduct (i.e., testing laboratories) MOT in 2006, to assess respondents' perceptions of the importance and accessibility of MOT and their preparedness to provide it.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>54% of physicians, 63% of testing laboratories and 60% of referring laboratories responded. Most perceived MOT to be important for treatment, diagnosis or prognosis now, and in 5 years (61% – 100%). Yet only 45% of physicians, 59% of testing labs and 53% of referring labs agreed that patients in their region were receiving MOT that is indicated as a standard of care. Physicians and laboratories perceived various barriers to providing MOT, including, among 70% of physicians, a lack of clear guidelines regarding clinical indications, and among laboratories, a lack of funding (73% – 100%). Testing laboratories were confident of their ability to determine whether and which MOT was indicated (77% and 82% respectively), and perceived that key elements of formal and continuing education were helpful (75% – 100%). By contrast, minorities of physicians were confident of their ability to assess whether and which MOT was indicated (46% and 34% respectively), and while majorities considered various continuing educational resources helpful (68% – 75%), only minorities considered key elements of formal education helpful in preparing for MOT (17% – 43%).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Physicians and laboratory professionals were enthusiastic about the value of MOT for cancer care but most did not believe patients were gaining adequate access to clinically necessary testing. Further, our results suggest that many were ill equipped as individual stakeholders, or as a coordinated system of referral and interpretation, to provide MOT. These challenges should inspire educational, training and other interventions to ensure that developments in molecular oncology can result in optimal cancer care.</p