76 research outputs found

    Rho-associated kinase signalling and the cancer microenvironment: novel biological implications and therapeutic opportunities

    Get PDF
    The Rho/ROCK pathway is involved in numerous pivotal cellular processes that have made it an area of intense study in cancer medicine, however, Rho-associated coiled-coil containing protein kinase (ROCK) inhibitors are yet to make an appearance in the clinical cancer setting. Their performance as an anti-cancer therapy has been varied in pre-clinical studies, however, they have been shown to be effective vasodilators in the treatment of hypertension and post-ischaemic stroke vasospasm. This review addresses the various roles the Rho/ROCK pathway plays in angiogenesis, tumour vascular tone and reciprocal feedback from the tumour microenvironment and explores the potential utility of ROCK inhibitors as effective vascular normalising agents. ROCK inhibitors may potentially enhance the delivery and efficacy of chemotherapy agents and improve the effectiveness of radiotherapy. As such, repurposing of these agents as adjuncts to standard treatments may significantly improve outcomes for patients with cancer. A deeper understanding of the controlled and dynamic regulation of the key components of the Rho pathway may lead to effective use of the Rho/ROCK inhibitors in the clinical management of cancer

    Chemotherapy and radiotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer

    Get PDF
    Background: Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a highly lethal disease with few effective treatment options. Over the past few decades, many anti-cancer therapies have been tested in the locally advanced and metastatic setting, with mixed results. This review attempts to synthesise all the randomised data available to help better inform patient and clinician decision-making when dealing with this difficult disease. Objectives: To assess the effect of chemotherapy, radiotherapy or both for first-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer. Our primary outcome was overall survival, while secondary outcomes include progression-free survival, grade 3/4 adverse events, therapy response and quality of life. Search methods: We searched for published and unpublished studies in CENTRAL (searched 14 June 2017), Embase (1980 to 14 June 2017), MEDLINE (1946 to 14 June 2017) and CANCERLIT (1999 to 2002) databases. We also handsearched all relevant conference abstracts published up until 14 June 2017. Selection criteria: All randomised studies assessing overall survival outcomes in patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Chemotherapy and radiotherapy, alone or in combination, were the eligible treatments. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently analysed studies, and a third settled any disputes. We extracted data on overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response rates, adverse events (AEs) and quality of life (QoL), and we assessed risk of bias for each study. Main results: We included 42 studies addressing chemotherapy in 9463 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. We did not identify any eligible studies on radiotherapy. We did not find any benefit for chemotherapy over best supportive care. However, two identified studies did not have sufficient data to be included in the analysis, and many of the chemotherapy regimens studied were outdated. Compared to gemcitabine alone, participants receiving 5FU had worse OS (HR 1.69, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.27, moderate-quality evidence), PFS (HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.92) and QoL. On the other hand, two studies showed FOLFIRINOX was better than gemcitabine for OS (HR 0.51 95% CI 0.43 to 0.60, moderate-quality evidence), PFS (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.57) and response rates (RR 3.38, 95% CI 2.01 to 5.65), but it increased the rate of side effects. The studies evaluating CO-101, ZD9331 and exatecan did not show benefit or harm when compared with gemcitabine alone. Giving gemcitabine at a fixed dose rate improved OS (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.94, high-quality evidence) but increased the rate of side effects when compared with bolus dosing. When comparing gemcitabine combinations to gemcitabine alone, gemcitabine plus platinum improved PFS (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.95) and response rates (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.98) but not OS (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.08, low-quality evidence). The rate of side effects increased. Gemcitabine plus fluoropyrimidine improved OS (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.95), PFS (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.87) and response rates (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.47, high-quality evidence), but it also increased side effects. Gemcitabine plus topoisomerase inhibitor did not improve survival outcomes but did increase toxicity. One study demonstrated that gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel improved OS (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.84, high-quality evidence), PFS (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.82) and response rates (RR 3.29, 95% CI 2.24 to 4.84) but increased side effects. Gemcitabine-containing multi-drug combinations (GEMOXEL or cisplatin/epirubicin/5FU/gemcitabine) improved OS (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.79, low-quality evidence), PFS (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.62) and QOL. We did not find any survival advantages when comparing 5FU combinations to 5FU alone. Authors' conclusions: Combination chemotherapy has recently overtaken the long-standing gemcitabine as the standard of care. FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel are highly efficacious, but our analysis shows that other combination regimens also offer a benefit. Selection of the most appropriate chemotherapy for individual patients still remains difficult, with clinicopathological stratification remaining elusive. Biomarker development is essential to help rationalise treatment selection for patients

    Immune-checkpoint inhibitors for metastatic colorectal cancer : a systematic review of clinical outcomes

    Get PDF
    Background. Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the fourth most deadly cancer worldwide. Unfortunately, a quarter of the patients are diagnosed at late stages, when surgical options are limited. Targeted therapies, particularly immune-checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), are the latest addition and have been studied herein regarding their efficacy outcomes. Methods. Clinical studies were identified through the PubMed, Scopus and Cochrane databases. Any trial that evaluated ICIs in patients with metastatic CRC (mCRC) and reported the objective response rate was deemed eligible. Data analysis was performed by employing the random-effects model in STATA v.17. Results. A total of 461 articles were identified; 13 clinical trials were included, encompassing a total cohort of 1209 patients. Our study determined that a single PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint blockade provides durable clinical response in mCRC patients with high microsatellite instability (MSI-H). The combinatorial therapy of CTLA-4 + PD-1 inhibitors also showed high response rates in pre-treated MSI-H patients. The single-arm REGONIVO trial reported durable clinical response in patients with microsatellite stable (MSS) status. Conclusions. Our study surmises that PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors as well as combination therapy with CTLA-4 and PD-1 inhibitors show encouraging response rates in mCRC patients, albeit exclusively in patients with cancer that are of MSI-H status. A single study suggests that nivolumab + regorafenib can reach a durable response rate in MSS patients; however, further studies in larger randomized settings are required

    Chemotherapy and radiotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer

    Get PDF
    Background: Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a highly lethal disease with few effective treatment options. Over the past few decades, many anti-cancer therapies have been tested in the locally advanced and metastatic setting, with mixed results. This review attempts to synthesise all the randomised data available to help better inform patient and clinician decision-making when dealing with this difficult disease. Objectives: To assess the effect of chemotherapy, radiotherapy or both for first-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer. Our primary outcome was overall survival, while secondary outcomes include progression-free survival, grade 3/4 adverse events, therapy response and quality of life. Search methods: We searched for published and unpublished studies in CENTRAL (searched 14 June 2017), Embase (1980 to 14 June 2017), MEDLINE (1946 to 14 June 2017) and CANCERLIT (1999 to 2002) databases. We also handsearched all relevant conference abstracts published up until 14 June 2017. Selection criteria: All randomised studies assessing overall survival outcomes in patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Chemotherapy and radiotherapy, alone or in combination, were the eligible treatments. Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently analysed studies, and a third settled any disputes. We extracted data on overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response rates, adverse events (AEs) and quality of life (QoL), and we assessed risk of bias for each study. Main results: We included 42 studies addressing chemotherapy in 9463 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. We did not identify any eligible studies on radiotherapy. We did not find any benefit for chemotherapy over best supportive care. However, two identified studies did not have sufficient data to be included in the analysis, and many of the chemotherapy regimens studied were outdated. Compared to gemcitabine alone, participants receiving 5FU had worse OS (HR 1.69, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.27, moderate-quality evidence), PFS (HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.92) and QoL. On the other hand, two studies showed FOLFIRINOX was better than gemcitabine for OS (HR 0.51 95% CI 0.43 to 0.60, moderate-quality evidence), PFS (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.57) and response rates (RR 3.38, 95% CI 2.01 to 5.65), but it increased the rate of side effects. The studies evaluating CO-101, ZD9331 and exatecan did not show benefit or harm when compared with gemcitabine alone. Giving gemcitabine at a fixed dose rate improved OS (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.94, high-quality evidence) but increased the rate of side effects when compared with bolus dosing. When comparing gemcitabine combinations to gemcitabine alone, gemcitabine plus platinum improved PFS (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.95) and response rates (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.98) but not OS (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.08, low-quality evidence). The rate of side effects increased. Gemcitabine plus fluoropyrimidine improved OS (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.95), PFS (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.87) and response rates (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.47, high-quality evidence), but it also increased side effects. Gemcitabine plus topoisomerase inhibitor did not improve survival outcomes but did increase toxicity. One study demonstrated that gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel improved OS (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.84, high-quality evidence), PFS (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.82) and response rates (RR 3.29, 95% CI 2.24 to 4.84) but increased side effects. Gemcitabine-containing multi-drug combinations (GEMOXEL or cisplatin/epirubicin/5FU/gemcitabine) improved OS (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.79, low-quality evidence), PFS (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.62) and QOL. We did not find any survival advantages when comparing 5FU combinations to 5FU alone. Authors' conclusions: Combination chemotherapy has recently overtaken the long-standing gemcitabine as the standard of care. FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel are highly efficacious, but our analysis shows that other combination regimens also offer a benefit. Selection of the most appropriate chemotherapy for individual patients still remains difficult, with clinicopathological stratification remaining elusive. Biomarker development is essential to help rationalise treatment selection for patient

    Retrospective evaluation of the use of pembrolizumab in malignant mesothelioma in a real-world Australian population

    Get PDF
    Introduction: We investigated the efficacy and toxicity of pembrolizumab in patients with mesothelioma from a real-world Australian population. We aimed to determine clinical factors and predictive biomarkers that could help select patients who are likely to benefit from pembrolizumab. Method: Patients with mesothelioma who were treated with pembrolizumab as part of the Insurance and Care New South Wales compensation scheme were included. Clinical information was collected retrospectively. Tumor biomarkers such as programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), BAP1, and CD3-positive (CD3+) tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) were examined using archival formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumor samples. Results: A total of 98 patients were included with a median age of 70 years (range, 46–91 y); 92% were men; 76% had epithelioid subtype; 21% had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0. Pembrolizumab was used as second-line or subsequent-line treatment in 94 patients and as first-line treatment in four patients. The overall response rate was 18%, and the disease control rate was 56%. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.8 months (95% confidence interval: 3.6–6.2), and the median overall survival (OS) was 9.5 months (95% confidence interval: 6.6–13.7). Immune-related adverse events occurred in 27% of patients, of which nine (9%) were of grade 3 or higher. In the multivariable analysis, factors independently associated with longer PFS included baseline ECOG status of 0 (median PFS: 12 mo versus 4 mo, p < 0.01) and PD-L1 tumor proportion score of greater than or equal to 1% (median PFS: 6 mo versus 4 mo, p < 0.01). Baseline platelet count of less than or equal to 400 × 109/liter was independently associated with longer PFS and OS (median PFS: 6 mo versus 2 mo, p = 0.05; median OS: 10 mo versus 4 mo, p = 0.01), whereas lack of pretreatment dexamethasone was independently associated with OS but not PFS (median OS: 10 mo versus 3 mo, p = 0.01). The odds of response were higher for patients with baseline ECOG status of 0 (p = 0.02) and with greater than or equal to 5% CD3+ TILs in the tumor (p < 0.01). PD-L1 expression, BAP1 loss, and CD3+ TILs in the stroma were not significantly associated with the overall response rate. Conclusions: Immunotherapy is a reasonable treatment option for patients with mesothelioma. Our results are comparable to other clinical trials investigating pembrolizumab in mesothelioma in terms of response. Good performance status assessment remains the most robust predictor for patient outcomes. CD3+ TILs in the tumor may help select patients that are likely to respond to pembrolizumab, whereas factors such as PD-L1 expression, baseline platelet count, and lack of pretreatment dexamethasone may help predict survival outcomes from pembrolizumab treatment

    Transient tissue priming via ROCK inhibition uncouples pancreatic cancer progression, sensitivity to chemotherapy, and metastasis

    Get PDF
    The emerging standard of care for patients with inoperable pancreatic cancer is a combination of cytotoxic drugs gemcitabine and Abraxane, but patient response remains moderate. Pancreatic cancer development and metastasis occur in complex settings, with reciprocal feedback from microenvironmental cues influencing both disease progression and drug response. Little is known about how sequential dual targeting of tumor tissue tension and vasculature before chemotherapy can affect tumor response. We used intravital imaging to assess how transient manipulation of the tumor tissue, or "priming," using the pharmaceutical Rho kinase inhibitor Fasudil affects response to chemotherapy. Intravital Förster resonance energy transfer imaging of a cyclin-dependent kinase 1 biosensor to monitor the efficacy of cytotoxic drugs revealed that priming improves pancreatic cancer response to gemcitabine/Abraxane at both primary and secondary sites. Transient priming also sensitized cells to shear stress and impaired colonization efficiency and fibrotic niche remodeling within the liver, three important features of cancer spread. Last, we demonstrate a graded response to priming in stratified patient-derived tumors, indicating that fine-tuned tissue manipulation before chemotherapy may offer opportunities in both primary and metastatic targeting of pancreatic cancer

    Identification of unique neoantigen qualities in long-term survivors of pancreatic cancer

    Get PDF
    Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is a lethal cancer with fewer than 7% of patients surviving past 5 years. T-cell immunity has been linked to the exceptional outcome of the few long-term survivors1,2, yet the relevant antigens remain unknown. Here we use genetic, immunohistochemical and transcriptional immunoprofiling, computational biophysics, and functional assays to identify T-cell antigens in long-term survivors of pancreatic cancer. Using whole-exome sequencing and in silico neoantigen prediction, we found that tumours with both the highest neoantigen number and the most abundant CD8+ T-cell infiltrates, but neither alone, stratified patients with the longest survival. Investigating the specific neoantigen qualities promoting T-cell activation in long-term survivors, we discovered that these individuals were enriched in neoantigen qualities defined by a fitness model, and neoantigens in the tumour antigen MUC16 (also known as CA125). A neoantigen quality fitness model conferring greater immunogenicity to neoantigens with differential presentation and homology to infectious disease-derived peptides identified long-term survivors in two independent datasets, whereas a neoantigen quantity model ascribing greater immunogenicity to increasing neoantigen number alone did not. We detected intratumoural and lasting circulating T-cell reactivity to both high-quality and MUC16 neoantigens in long-term survivors of pancreatic cancer, including clones with specificity to both high-quality neoantigens and predicted cross-reactive microbial epitopes, consistent with neoantigen molecular mimicry. Notably, we observed selective loss of high-quality and MUC16 neoantigenic clones on metastatic progression, suggesting neoantigen immunoediting. Our results identify neoantigens with unique qualities as T-cell targets in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. More broadly, we identify neoantigen quality as a biomarker for immunogenic tumours that may guide the application of immunotherapies
    corecore