Molecular targets in the discovery and development of novel antimetastatic agents: current progress and future prospects

Tumour invasion and metastasis have been recognized as major causal factors in the morbidity and mortality among cancer patients. Many advances in the knowledge of cancer metastasis have yielded an impressive array of attractive drug targets, including enzymes, receptors and multiple signalling pathways. The present review summarizes the molecular pathogenesis of metastasis and the identification of novel molecular targets used in the discovery of antimetastatic agents. Several promising targets have been highlighted, including receptor tyrosine kinases, effector molecules involved in angiogenesis, matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs), urokinase plasminogen activator, adhesion molecules and their receptors, signalling pathways (e.g. phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase, phospholipase Cγ1, mitogen-activated protein kinases, c-Src kinase, c-Met kinases and heat shock protein. The discovery and development of potential novel therapeutics for each of the targets are also discussed in this review. Among these, the most promising agents that have shown remarkable clinical outcome are anti-angiogenic agents (e.g. bevacizumab). Newer agents, such as c-Met kinase inhibitors, are still undergoing preclinical studies and are yet to have their clinical efficacy proven. Some therapeutics, such as first-generation MMP inhibitors (MMPIs; e.g. marimastat) and more selective versions of them (e.g. prinomastat, tanomastat), have undergone clinical trials. Unfortunately, these drugs produced serious adverse effects that led to the premature termination of their development. In the future, third-generation MMPIs and inhibitors of signalling pathways and adhesion molecules could form valuable novel classes of drugs in the anticancer armamentarium to combat metastasis

Feasibility of brief psychological distress screening by a community-based telephone helpline for cancer patients and carers

Background Up to one-third of people affected by cancer experience ongoing psychological distress and would benefit from screening followed by an appropriate level of psychological intervention. This rarely occurs in routine clinical practice due to barriers such as lack of time and experience. This study investigated the feasibility of community-based telephone helpline operators screening callers affected by cancer for their level of distress using a brief screening tool (Distress Thermometer), and triaging to the appropriate level of care using a tiered model. Methods Consecutive cancer patients and carers who contacted the helpline from September-December 2006 (n = 341) were invited to participate. Routine screening and triage was conducted by helpline operators at this time. Additional socio-demographic and psychosocial adjustment data were collected by telephone interview by research staff following the initial call. Results The Distress Thermometer had good overall accuracy in detecting general psychosocial morbidity (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale cut-off score ≥ 15) for cancer patients (AUC = 0.73) and carers (AUC = 0.70). We found 73% of participants met the Distress Thermometer cut-off for distress caseness according to the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (a score ≥ 4), and optimal sensitivity (83%, 77%) and specificity (51%, 48%) were obtained with cut-offs of ≥ 4 and ≥ 6 in the patient and carer groups respectively. Distress was significantly associated with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale scores (total, as well as anxiety and depression subscales) and level of care in cancer patients, as well as with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale anxiety subscale for carers. There was a trend for more highly distressed callers to be triaged to more intensive care, with patients with distress scores ≥ 4 more likely to receive extended or specialist care. Conclusions Our data suggest that it was feasible for community-based cancer helpline operators to screen callers for distress using a brief screening tool, the Distress Thermometer, and to triage callers to an appropriate level of care using a tiered model. The Distress Thermometer is a rapid and non-invasive alternative to longer psychometric instruments, and may provide part of the solution in ensuring distressed patients and carers affected by cancer are identified and supported appropriately

Acceptability of the Distress Thermometer and Problem List to community-based telephone cancer helpline operators, and to cancer patients and carers

Background Cancer can be a distressing experience for cancer patients and carers, impacting on psychological, social, physical and spiritual functioning. However, health professionals often fail to detect distress in their patients due to time constraints and a lack of experience. Also, with the focus on the patient, carer needs are often overlooked. This study investigated the acceptability of brief distress screening with the Distress Thermometer (DT) and Problem List (PL) to operators of a community-based telephone helpline, as well as to cancer patients and carers calling the service. Methods Operators (n = 18) monitored usage of the DT and PL with callers (cancer patients/carers, >18 years, and English-speaking) from September-December 2006 (n = 666). The DT is a single item, 11-point scale to rate level of distress. The associated PL identifies the cause of distress. Results The DT and PL were used on 90% of eligible callers, most providing valid responses. Benefits included having an objective, structured and consistent means for distress screening and triage to supportive care services. Reported challenges included apparent inappropriateness of the tools due to the nature of the call or level of caller distress, the DT numeric scale, and the level of operator training. Conclusions We observed positive outcomes to using the DT and PL, although operators reported some challenges. Overcoming these challenges may improve distress screening particularly by less experienced clinicians, and further development of the PL items and DT scale may assist with administration. The DT and PL allow clinicians to direct/prioritise interventions or referrals, although ongoing training and support is critical in distress screening

Screening for psychological distress in patients with lung cancer: results of a clinical audit evaluating the use of the patient Distress Thermometer

Patients with lung cancer frequently suffer psychological distress and guidelines in the United Kingdom recommend screening of all cancer patients for this problem. The audit investigated use of the Distress Thermometer in terms of staff adherence to locally developed guidelines, patient willingness to use the tool, its impact on referral rates to clinical psychology services and concordance between the tool and the clinical assessment. Use of the Distress Thermometer was audited over a 3-month period in one lung cancer outpatient clinic. Referrals to clinical psychology services in response to clearly delineated referral indicators were assessed. Patient-reported outcomes were compared with practitioner assessment of need during clinical consultations to see whether the tool was measuring distress effectively. Thirty three of 34 patients used the Distress Thermometer during the audit period. Ten reported distress levels above 4 in the emotional or family problems domains. On ten occasions, the clinical interview identified problems not elicited by the Distress Thermometer. Guidelines were adhered to by staff, and patients were offered information about local support services and referral to clinical psychology services where indicated. Whilst all patients were happy to receive written information about further sources of support, none wanted to be referred to psychological services at that time. The Distress Thermometer is acceptable to patients with lung cancer in outpatient settings but it did not increase referrals for psychological support. Staff found it to be a useful tool in opening up communication about patient issues although it should not replace a comprehensive clinical interview

The Evolution of Extracellular Fibrillins and Their Functional Domains

Fibrillins constitute the major backbone of multifunctional microfibrils in elastic and non-elastic extracellular matrices, and are known to interact with several binding partners including tropoelastin and integrins. Here, we study the evolution of fibrillin proteins. Following sequence collection from 39 organisms representative of the major evolutionary groups, molecular evolutionary genetics and phylogeny inference software were used to generate a series of evolutionary trees using distance-based and maximum likelihood methods. The resulting trees support the concept of gene duplication as a means of generating the three vertebrate fibrillins. Beginning with a single fibrillin sequence found in invertebrates and jawless fish, a gene duplication event, which coincides with the appearance of elastin, led to the creation of two genes. One of the genes significantly evolved to become the gene for present-day fibrillin-1, while the other underwent evolutionary changes, including a second duplication, to produce present-day fibrillin-2 and fibrillin-3. Detailed analysis of several sequences and domains within the fibrillins reveals distinct similarities and differences across various species. The RGD integrin-binding site in TB4 of all fibrillins is conserved in cephalochordates and vertebrates, while the integrin-binding site within cbEGF18 of fibrillin-3 is a recent evolutionary change. The proline-rich domain in fibrillin-1, glycine-rich domain in fibrillin-2 and proline-/glycine-rich domain in fibrillin-3 are found in all analyzed tetrapod species, whereas it is completely replaced with an EGF-like domain in cnidarians, arthropods, molluscs and urochordates. All collected sequences contain the first 9-cysteine hybrid domain, and the second 8-cysteine hybrid domain with exception of arthropods containing an atypical 10-cysteine hybrid domain 2. Furin cleavage sites within the N- and C-terminal unique domains were found for all analyzed fibrillin sequences, indicating an essential role for processing of the fibrillin pro-proteins. The four cysteines in the unique N-terminus and the two cysteines in the unique C-terminus are also highly conserved

Are one or two simple questions sufficient to detect depression in cancer and palliative care? A Bayesian meta-analysis

The purpose of this study is to examine the value of one or two simple verbal questions in the detection of depression in cancer settings. This study is a systematic literature search of abstract and full text databases to January 2008. Key authors were contacted for unpublished studies. Seventeen analyses were found. Of these, 13 were conducted in late stage palliative settings. (1) Single depression question: across nine studies, the prevalence of depression was 16%. A single ‘depression' question enabled the detection of depression in 160 out of 223 true cases, a sensitivity of 72%, and correctly reassured 964 out of 1166 non-depressed cancer sufferers, a specificity of 83%. The positive predictive value (PPV) was 44% and the negative predictive value (NPV) 94%. (2) Single interest question: there were only three studies examining the ‘loss-of-interest' question, with a combined prevalence of 14%. This question allowed the detection of 60 out of 72 cases (sensitivity 83%) and excluded 394 from 459 non-depressed cases (specificity of 86%). The PPV was 48% and the NPV 97%. (3) Two questions (low mood and low interest): five studies examined two questions with a combined prevalence of 17%. The two-question combination facilitated a diagnosis of depression in 138 of 151 true cases (sensitivity 91%) and gave correct reassurance to 645 of 749 non-cases (specificity 86%). The PPV was 57% and the NPV 98%. Simple verbal methods perform well at excluding depression in the non-depressed but perform poorly at confirming depression. The ‘two question' method is significantly more accurate than either single question but clinicians should not rely on these simple questions alone and should be prepared to assess the patient more thoroughly

Screening for Emotional Distress in Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review of Assessment Instruments

Screening for emotional distress is becoming increasingly common in cancer care. This systematic review examines the psychometric properties of the existing tools used to screen patients for emotional distress, with the goal of encouraging screening programs to use standardized tools that have strong psychometrics. Systematic searches of MEDLINE and PsycINFO databases for English-language studies in cancer patients were performed using a uniform set of key words (eg, depression, anxiety, screening, validation, and scale), and the retrieved studies were independently evaluated by two reviewers. Evaluation criteria included the number of validation studies, the number of participants, generalizability, reliability, the quality of the criterion measure, sensitivity, and specificity. The literature search yielded 106 validation studies that described a total of 33 screening measures. Many generic and cancer-specific scales satisfied a fairly high threshold of quality in terms of their psychometric properties and generalizability. Among the ultrashort measures (ie, those containing one to four items), the Combined Depression Questions performed best in patients receiving palliative care. Among the short measures (ie, those containing five to 20 items), the Center for Epidemiologic Studies–Depression Scale and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale demonstrated adequate psychometric properties. Among the long measures (ie, those containing 21–50 items), the Beck Depression Inventory and the General Health Questionaire–28 met all evaluation criteria. The PsychoSocial Screen for Cancer, the Questionnaire on Stress in Cancer Patients–Revised, and the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist are long measures that can also be recommended for routine screening. In addition, other measures may be considered for specific indications or disease types. Some measures, particularly newly developed cancer-specific scales, require further validation against structured clinical interviews (the criterion standard for validation measures) before they can be recommended

Effect of Hydrocortisone on Mortality and Organ Support in Patients With Severe COVID-19: The REMAP-CAP COVID-19 Corticosteroid Domain Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Evidence regarding corticosteroid use for severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is limited. Objective: To determine whether hydrocortisone improves outcome for patients with severe COVID-19. Design, Setting, and Participants: An ongoing adaptive platform trial testing multiple interventions within multiple therapeutic domains, for example, antiviral agents, corticosteroids, or immunoglobulin. Between March 9 and June 17, 2020, 614 adult patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled and randomized within at least 1 domain following admission to an intensive care unit (ICU) for respiratory or cardiovascular organ support at 121 sites in 8 countries. Of these, 403 were randomized to open-label interventions within the corticosteroid domain. The domain was halted after results from another trial were released. Follow-up ended August 12, 2020. Interventions: The corticosteroid domain randomized participants to a fixed 7-day course of intravenous hydrocortisone (50 mg or 100 mg every 6 hours) (n = 143), a shock-dependent course (50 mg every 6 hours when shock was clinically evident) (n = 152), or no hydrocortisone (n = 108). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was organ support-free days (days alive and free of ICU-based respiratory or cardiovascular support) within 21 days, where patients who died were assigned -1 day. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model that included all patients enrolled with severe COVID-19, adjusting for age, sex, site, region, time, assignment to interventions within other domains, and domain and intervention eligibility. Superiority was defined as the posterior probability of an odds ratio greater than 1 (threshold for trial conclusion of superiority >99%). Results: After excluding 19 participants who withdrew consent, there were 384 patients (mean age, 60 years; 29% female) randomized to the fixed-dose (n = 137), shock-dependent (n = 146), and no (n = 101) hydrocortisone groups; 379 (99%) completed the study and were included in the analysis. The mean age for the 3 groups ranged between 59.5 and 60.4 years; most patients were male (range, 70.6%-71.5%); mean body mass index ranged between 29.7 and 30.9; and patients receiving mechanical ventilation ranged between 50.0% and 63.5%. For the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively, the median organ support-free days were 0 (IQR, -1 to 15), 0 (IQR, -1 to 13), and 0 (-1 to 11) days (composed of 30%, 26%, and 33% mortality rates and 11.5, 9.5, and 6 median organ support-free days among survivors). The median adjusted odds ratio and bayesian probability of superiority were 1.43 (95% credible interval, 0.91-2.27) and 93% for fixed-dose hydrocortisone, respectively, and were 1.22 (95% credible interval, 0.76-1.94) and 80% for shock-dependent hydrocortisone compared with no hydrocortisone. Serious adverse events were reported in 4 (3%), 5 (3%), and 1 (1%) patients in the fixed-dose, shock-dependent, and no hydrocortisone groups, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with severe COVID-19, treatment with a 7-day fixed-dose course of hydrocortisone or shock-dependent dosing of hydrocortisone, compared with no hydrocortisone, resulted in 93% and 80% probabilities of superiority with regard to the odds of improvement in organ support-free days within 21 days. However, the trial was stopped early and no treatment strategy met prespecified criteria for statistical superiority, precluding definitive conclusions. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02735707