HE4 as a Biomarker for Endometrial Cancer

There are currently no blood biomarkers in routine clinical use in endometrial carcinoma (EC). Human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) is a glycoprotein that is overexpressed in the serum of patients with EC, making it a good candidate for use as a diagnostic and/or prognostic biomarker. HE4 is correlated with poor prognostic factors, including stage, myometrial invasion and lymph node metastases, which means it could be used to guide decisions regarding the extent of surgery and need for adjuvant therapy. Serum HE4 has also shown promise for predicting responses to progestin therapy in early-stage EC. The use of algorithms and indices incorporating serum HE4 and other biomarkers, including clinical and imaging variables, is an area of increasing interest. Serum HE4 levels rise with age and renal dysfunction, which may affect the interpretation of results. This review covers the evidence supporting the use of HE4 as an EC biomarker for diagnosis, prognosis, recurrence monitoring, and prediction of therapy response. The evidence for combining serum HE4 with other biomarkers, including clinical and imaging variables, its value as a biomarker in other biofluids and potential challenges of its clinical use are also discussed

HE4 as a Biomarker for Endometrial Cancer

From MDPI via Jisc Publications RouterHistory: accepted 2021-09-17, pub-electronic 2021-09-23Publication status: PublishedFunder: Manchester Biomedical Research Centre; Grant(s): IS-BRC-1215-20007Funder: National Institute for Health Research; Grant(s): NIHR300650There are currently no blood biomarkers in routine clinical use in endometrial carcinoma (EC). Human epididymis protein 4 (HE4) is a glycoprotein that is overexpressed in the serum of patients with EC, making it a good candidate for use as a diagnostic and/or prognostic biomarker. HE4 is correlated with poor prognostic factors, including stage, myometrial invasion and lymph node metastases, which means it could be used to guide decisions regarding the extent of surgery and need for adjuvant therapy. Serum HE4 has also shown promise for predicting responses to progestin therapy in early-stage EC. The use of algorithms and indices incorporating serum HE4 and other biomarkers, including clinical and imaging variables, is an area of increasing interest. Serum HE4 levels rise with age and renal dysfunction, which may affect the interpretation of results. This review covers the evidence supporting the use of HE4 as an EC biomarker for diagnosis, prognosis, recurrence monitoring, and prediction of therapy response. The evidence for combining serum HE4 with other biomarkers, including clinical and imaging variables, its value as a biomarker in other biofluids and potential challenges of its clinical use are also discussed

Immunotherapy-related adverse events in real-world patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer on chemoimmunotherapy: a Spinnaker study sub-analysis

BackgroundThe Spinnaker study evaluated survival outcomes and prognostic factors in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer receiving first-line chemoimmunotherapy in the real world. This sub-analysis assessed the immunotherapy-related adverse effects (irAEs) seen in this cohort, their impact on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), and related clinical factors.MethodsThe Spinnaker study was a retrospective multicentre observational cohort study of patients treated with first-line pembrolizumab plus platinum-based chemotherapy in six United Kingdom and one Swiss oncology centres. Data were collected on patient characteristics, survival outcomes, frequency and severity of irAEs, and peripheral immune-inflammatory blood markers, including the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) and systemic immune-inflammation index (SII).ResultsA total of 308 patients were included; 132 (43%) experienced any grade irAE, 100 (32%) Grade 1–2, and 49 (16%) Grade 3–4 irAEs. The median OS in patients with any grade irAES was significantly longer (17.5 months [95% CI, 13.4–21.6 months]) than those without (10.1 months [95% CI, 8.3–12.0 months]) (p<0.001), either if Grade 1–2 (p=0.003) or Grade 3–4 irAEs (p=0.042). The median PFS in patients with any grade irAEs was significantly longer (10.1 months [95% CI, 9.0–11.2 months]) than those without (6.1 months [95% CI, 5.2–7.1 months]) (p<0.001), either if Grade 1–2 (p=0.011) or Grade 3–4 irAEs (p=0.036). A higher rate of irAEs of any grade and specifically Grade 1–2 irAEs correlated with NLR <4 (p=0.013 and p=0.018), SII <1,440 (p=0.029 ad p=0.039), response to treatment (p=0.001 and p=0.034), a higher rate of treatment discontinuation (p<0.00001 and p=0.041), and the NHS-Lung prognostic classes (p=0.002 and p=0.008).ConclusionsThese results confirm survival outcome benefits in patients with irAEs and suggest a higher likelihood of Grade 1–2 irAEs in patients with lower NLR or SII values or according to the NHS-Lung score

Convalescent plasma in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 (RECOVERY): a randomised controlled, open-label, platform trial

SummaryBackground Azithromycin has been proposed as a treatment for COVID-19 on the basis of its immunomodulatoryactions. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of azithromycin in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19.Methods In this randomised, controlled, open-label, adaptive platform trial (Randomised Evaluation of COVID-19Therapy [RECOVERY]), several possible treatments were compared with usual care in patients admitted to hospitalwith COVID-19 in the UK. The trial is underway at 176 hospitals in the UK. Eligible and consenting patients wererandomly allocated to either usual standard of care alone or usual standard of care plus azithromycin 500 mg once perday by mouth or intravenously for 10 days or until discharge (or allocation to one of the other RECOVERY treatmentgroups). Patients were assigned via web-based simple (unstratified) randomisation with allocation concealment andwere twice as likely to be randomly assigned to usual care than to any of the active treatment groups. Participants andlocal study staff were not masked to the allocated treatment, but all others involved in the trial were masked to theoutcome data during the trial. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality, assessed in the intention-to-treatpopulation. The trial is registered with ISRCTN, 50189673, and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04381936.Findings Between April 7 and Nov 27, 2020, of 16 442 patients enrolled in the RECOVERY trial, 9433 (57%) wereeligible and 7763 were included in the assessment of azithromycin. The mean age of these study participants was65·3 years (SD 15·7) and approximately a third were women (2944 [38%] of 7763). 2582 patients were randomlyallocated to receive azithromycin and 5181 patients were randomly allocated to usual care alone. Overall,561 (22%) patients allocated to azithromycin and 1162 (22%) patients allocated to usual care died within 28 days(rate ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·87–1·07; p=0·50). No significant difference was seen in duration of hospital stay (median10 days [IQR 5 to >28] vs 11 days [5 to >28]) or the proportion of patients discharged from hospital alive within 28 days(rate ratio 1·04, 95% CI 0·98–1·10; p=0·19). Among those not on invasive mechanical ventilation at baseline, nosignificant difference was seen in the proportion meeting the composite endpoint of invasive mechanical ventilationor death (risk ratio 0·95, 95% CI 0·87–1·03; p=0·24).Interpretation In patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19, azithromycin did not improve survival or otherprespecified clinical outcomes. Azithromycin use in patients admitted to hospital with COVID-19 should be restrictedto patients in whom there is a clear antimicrobial indication

CDK4/6 inhibitors versus weekly paclitaxel for treatment of ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer with impending or established visceral crisis

PURPOSE: ER+/HER2- advanced breast cancer (ABC) with visceral crisis (VC) or impending VC (IVC) is commonly treated with chemotherapy instead of CDK4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i). However, there is little evidence to confirm which treatment is superior. This study compared outcomes of patients with ER+/HER2- ABC and IVC/VC treated with CDK4/6i or weekly paclitaxel.METHODS: Patients with ER+/HER2- ABC receiving first line treatment at a large tertiary UK cancer centre from 1-Mar-2017 to 30-Jun-2021 were retrospectively identified. Hospital records were screened for IVC/VC affecting the liver, lungs/mediastinum, gastrointestinal tract and/or bone marrow. Baseline demographics, clinical data and survival outcomes were recorded up to 30-Jul-2022.RESULTS: 27/396 (6.8%) patients with ABC who received CDK4/6i and 32/86 (37.2%) who received paclitaxel had IVC/VC. Median time to treatment failure (TTF), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly longer in the CDK4/6i compared to paclitaxel cohort: TTF 17.3 vs. 3.5 months (HR 0.33, 95%CI 0.17-0.61, p = 0.0002), PFS 17.8 vs. 4.5 months (HR 0.38, 95%CI 0.21-0.67, p = 0.002), OS 24.6 vs. 6.7 months (HR 0.37, 95%CI 0.20-0.68, p = 0.002). The median time to first improvement in IVC/VC was similar in patients receiving CDK4/6i compared to paclitaxel (3.9 vs. 3.6 weeks, p = 0.773). Disease control at 4 months was not significantly different in the CDK4/6i and paclitaxel cohorts (77.8% vs. 59.4%, p = 0.168). In multivariate analysis, treatment with CDK4/6i was independently associated with a longer PFS compared to paclitaxel (HR 0.31, 95%CI 0.12-0.78, p = 0.015).CONCLUSION: In this retrospective study, patients with ER+/HER2- ABC and IVC/VC treated with CDK4/6i had a significantly better survival compared to those treated with weekly paclitaxel. Further prospective studies that minimise possible selection bias are recommended.</p

Irradiation Decreases the Neuroendocrine Biomarker Pro-Opiomelanocortin in Small Cell Lung Cancer Cells In Vitro and In Vivo.

BACKGROUND:Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an extremely aggressive disease, commonly displaying therapy-resistant relapse. We have previously identified neuroendocrine and epithelial phenotypes in SCLC tumours and the neuroendocrine marker, pro-opiomelanocortin (POMC), correlated with worse overall survival in patients. However, the effect of treatment on these phenotypes is not understood. The current study aimed to determine the effect of repeated irradiation treatment on SCLC cell phenotype, focussing on the neuroendocrine marker, POMC. RESULTS:Human SCLC cells (DMS 79) were established as subcutaneous xenograft tumours in CBA nude mice and then exposed to repeated 2Gy irradiation. In untreated animals, POMC in the blood closely mirrored tumour growth; an ideal characteristic for a circulating biomarker. Following repeated localised irradiation in vivo, circulating POMC decreased (p< 0.01), in parallel with a decrease in tumour size, but remained low even when the tumours re-established. The excised tumours displayed reduced and distinctly heterogeneous expression of POMC compared to untreated tumours. There was no difference in the epithelial marker, cytokeratin. However, there were significantly more N-cadherin positive cells in the irradiated tumours. To investigate the tumour response to irradiation, DMS79 cells were repeatedly irradiated in vitro and the surviving cells selected. POMC expression was reduced, while mesenchymal markers N-cadherin, β1-integrin, fibroblast-specific protein 1, β-catenin and Zeb1 expression were amplified in the more irradiation-primed cells. There were no consistent changes in epithelial marker expression. Cell morphology changed dramatically with repeatedly irradiated cells displaying a more elongated shape, suggesting a switch to a more mesenchymal phenotype. CONCLUSIONS:In summary, POMC biomarker expression and secretion were reduced in SCLC tumours which regrew after irradiation and in repeatedly irradiation (irradiation-primed) cells. Therefore, POMC was no longer predictive of tumour burden. This highlights the importance of fully evaluating biomarkers during and after therapy to assess clinical utility. Furthermore, the gain in mesenchymal characteristics in irradiated cells could be indicative of a more invasive phenotype

POMC heterogeneity in xenograft tumours after irradiation.

<p>DMS 79 cells were established as subcutaneous tumours in nude mice and either left untreated (A-C) or exposed to IR for 10 consecutive days at 2Gy/day (D-G). A central section of the tumour was stained for POMC using our own N1C11 antibody. (A&D) show entire tumour cross-sections, (B&C) show strong homogeneous POMC staining in separate tumour areas in untreated DMS 79 xenografts. (E-G) show viable tumour cell regions of an irradiated DMS 79 xenograft revealing (E) strong staining, (F) weaker heterogeneous staining, (G) weak staining. (H) Quantitive assessment by positive pixel analysis of untreated tumours and 20Gy IR treated tumours stained for POMC. (I) POMC gene expression was analysed in all untreated and 20Gy IR tumours. Tumours presented are representative of 3–5/group with all other tumours in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0148404#pone.0148404.s002" target="_blank">S2 Fig</a>.</p

DMS 79 phenotype is not altered after one irradiation cycle in vitro.

<p>DMS 79 cells were counted on day 0 and then irradiated at 2Gy and 5Gy. Viable counts were conducted up to 7 days post-irradiation before cells were stained for POMC, cytokeratin (CK) and N-Cadherin. All irradiation cycles were conducted on 3 independent cultures. * p = <0.05 ** p = <0.01 *** p = <0.001</p