Subcellular mRNA Localization Regulates Ribosome Biogenesis in Migrating Cells

Translation of ribosomal protein-coding mRNAs (RP-mRNAs) constitutes a key step in ribosome biogenesis, but the mechanisms that modulate RP-mRNA translation in coordination with other cellular processes are poorly defined. Here, we show that subcellular localization of RP-mRNAs acts as a key regulator of their translation during cell migration. As cells migrate into their surroundings, RP-mRNAs localize to the actin-rich cell protrusions. This localization is mediated by La-related protein 6 (LARP6), an RNA-binding protein that is enriched in protrusions. Protrusions act as hotspots of translation for RP-mRNAs, enhancing RP synthesis, ribosome biogenesis, and the overall protein synthesis in migratory cells. In human breast carcinomas, epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) upregulates LARP6 expression to enhance protein synthesis and support invasive growth. Our findings reveal LARP6-mediated mRNA localization as a key regulator of ribosome biogenesis during cell migration and demonstrate a role for this process in cancer progression downstream of EMT

Phase IB Dose Escalation and Expansion Study of AKT Inhibitor Afuresertib with Carboplatin and Paclitaxel in Recurrent Platinum-resistant Ovarian Cancer

PURPOSE: Preclinically, AKT kinase inhibition restores drug sensitivity in platinum-resistant tumors.Here the pan-AKT kinase inhibitor afuresertib was given in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin (PC) in patients with recurrent platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer (PROC) and primary platinum refractory ovarian cancer (PPROC). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Part I was a combination 3+3 dose-escalation study for recurrent ovarian cancer. Patients received daily continuous oral afuresertib at 50-150 mg/day with three-weekly intravenous paclitaxel (175 mg/m2) and carboplatin (AUC5) for 6 cycles followed by maintenance afuresertib at 125mg/day until progression or toxicity. Part II was a single arm evaluation of the clinical activity of this combination in recurrent PROC (Cohort A) or PPROC (Cohort B). Patients received oral afuresertib at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) defined in Part I in combination with PC for 6 cycles, followed by maintenance afuresertib. Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability of afuresertib in combination with PC (Part I, dose-escalation), and investigator-assessed overall response rate (ORR) as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 (Part II). RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients enrolled into Part I, and 30 into Part II. Three dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) of grade 3 rash were observed, one at 125mg and two at 150mg afuresertib. The MTD of afuresertib in combination with PC was therefore identified as 125 mg/day. (etc -see manuscript for full version)

Risk of Ovarian Cancer Relapse Score A Prognostic Algorithm to Predict Relapse Following Treatment for Advanced Ovarian Cancer

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to construct a prognostic index that predicts risk of relapse in women who have completed first-line treatment for ovarian cancer (OC). METHODS: A database of OC cases from 2000 to 2010 was interrogated for International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage, grade and histological subtype of cancer, preoperative and posttreatment CA-125 level, presence or absence of residual disease after cytoreductive surgery and on postchemotherapy computed tomography scan, and time to progression and death. The strongest predictors of relapse were included into an algorithm, the Risk of Ovarian Cancer Relapse (ROVAR) score. RESULTS: Three hundred fifty-four cases of OC were analyzed to generate the ROVAR score. Factors selected were preoperative serum CA-125, International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage and grade of cancer, and presence of residual disease at posttreatment computed tomography scan. In the validation data set, the ROVAR score had a sensitivity and specificity of 94% and 61%, respectively. The concordance index for the validation data set was 0.91 (95% confidence interval, 0.85-0.96). The score allows patient stratification into low (<0.33), intermediate (0.34–0.67), and high (>0.67) probability of relapse. CONCLUSIONS: The ROVAR score stratifies patients according to their risk of relapse following first-line treatment for OC. This can broadly facilitate the appropriate tailoring of posttreatment care and support

A phase I open-label, dose-escalation study of NUC-3373, a targeted thymidylate synthase inhibitor, in patients with advanced cancer (NuTide:301)

\ua9 The Author(s) 2024.Purpose: 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) is inefficiently converted to the active anti-cancer metabolite, fluorodeoxyuridine-monophosphate (FUDR-MP), is associated with dose-limiting toxicities and challenging administration schedules. NUC-3373 is a phosphoramidate nucleotide analog of fluorodeoxyuridine (FUDR) designed to overcome these limitations and replace fluoropyrimidines such as 5-FU. Patients and methods: NUC-3373 was administered as monotherapy to patients with advanced solid tumors refractory to standard therapy via intravenous infusion either on Days 1, 8, 15 and 22 (Part 1) or on Days 1 and 15 (Part 2) of 28-day cycles until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary objectives were maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended Phase II dose (RP2D) and schedule of NUC-3373. Secondary objectives included pharmacokinetics (PK), and anti-tumor activity. Results: Fifty-nine patients received weekly NUC-3373 in 9 cohorts in Part 1 (n = 43) and 3 alternate-weekly dosing cohorts in Part 2 (n = 16). They had received a median of 3 prior lines of treatment (range: 0–11) and 74% were exposed to prior fluoropyrimidines. Four experienced dose-limiting toxicities: two Grade (G) 3 transaminitis; one G2 headache; and one G3 transient hypotension. Commonest treatment-related G3 adverse event of raised transaminases occurred in &lt; 10% of patients. NUC-3373 showed a favorable PK profile, with dose-proportionality and a prolonged half-life compared to 5-FU. A best overall response of stable disease was observed, with prolonged progression-free survival. Conclusion: NUC-3373 was well-tolerated in a heavily pre-treated solid tumor patient population, including those who had relapsed on prior 5-FU. The MTD and RP2D was defined as 2500 mg/m2 NUC-3373 weekly. NUC-3373 is currently in combination treatment studies. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov registry number NCT02723240. Trial registered on 8th December 2015. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02723240

Weekly platinum-based chemotherapy versus 3-weekly platinum-based chemotherapy for newly diagnosed ovarian cancer (ICON8): quality-of-life results of a phase 3, randomised, controlled trial

Background: The ICON8 study reported no significant improvement in progression-free survival (a primary endpoint) with weekly chemotherapy compared with standard 3-weekly treatment among patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. All ICON8 patients were eligible to take part in the accompanying health-related quality-of-life study, which measured the effect of treatment on self-reported wellbeing, reported here. Methods: In this open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3, three-arm, Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup (GCIG) trial done at 117 hospital sites in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, South Korea, and Republic of Ireland, women (aged at least 18 years) with newly diagnosed, histologically confirmed International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IC–IV ovarian cancer and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2 were randomly assigned (1:1:1) centrally using minimisation to group 1 (intravenous carboplatin area under the curve [AUC]5 or AUC6 and 175 mg/m2 intravenous paclitaxel every 3 weeks), group 2 (carboplatin AUC5 or AUC6 every 3 weeks and 80 mg/m2 paclitaxel weekly), or group 3 (carboplatin AUC2 weekly and 80 mg/m2 paclitaxel weekly). Randomisation was stratified by GCIG group, disease stage, and outcome and timing of surgery. Patients and clinicians were not masked to treatment assignment. Patients underwent immediate or delayed primary surgery according to clinicians' choice. Patients were asked to complete European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OV28 questionnaires at enrolment, before each chemotherapy cycle, then 6-weekly up to 9 months, 3-monthly up to 2 years, and 6-monthly up to 5 years. Quality of life was a prespecified secondary outcome of the ICON8 study. Within the quality-of-life study, the co-primary endpoints were QLQ-C30 global health score at 9 months (cross-sectional analysis) and mean QLQ-C30 global health score from randomisation to 9 months (longitudinal analysis). Data analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. The trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01654146 and ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN10356387, and is currently in long-term follow up. Findings: Between June 6, 2011, and Nov 28, 2014, 1566 patients were recruited into ICON8 (522 were included in group 1, 523 in group 2, and 521 in group 3). Baseline quality-of-life questionnaires were completed by 1438 (92%) of 1566 patients and 9-month questionnaires by 882 (69%) of 1280 patients. We observed no significant difference in global health score at 9 months (cross-sectional analysis) between study groups (group 2 vs group 1, difference in mean score 2·3, 95% CI −0·4 to 4·9, p=0·095; group 3 vs group 1, −0·8, −3·8 to 2·2, p=0·61). Using longitudinal analysis, we found lower global health scores for those receiving weekly paclitaxel than for those receiving 3-weekly chemotherapy (group 2 vs group 1, mean difference −1·8, 95% CI −3·6 to −0·1, p=0·043; group 3 vs group 1, −2·9, −4·7 to −1·1, p=0·0018). Interpretation: We found no evidence of a difference in global quality of life between treatment groups at 9 months; however, patients receiving weekly treatment reported lower mean quality of life across the 9-month period after randomisation. Taken together with the lack of progression-free survival benefit, these findings do not support routine use of weekly paclitaxel-containing regimens in the management of newly diagnosed ovarian cancer. Funding: Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council, Health Research Board Ireland, Irish Cancer Society, and Cancer Australia

Weekly platinum-based chemotherapy versus 3-weekly platinum-based chemotherapy for newly diagnosed ovarian cancer (ICON8): quality-of-life results of a phase 3, randomised, controlled trial

BACKGROUND: The ICON8 study reported no significant improvement in progression-free survival (a primary endpoint) with weekly chemotherapy compared with standard 3-weekly treatment among patients with epithelial ovarian cancer. All ICON8 patients were eligible to take part in the accompanying health-related quality-of-life study, which measured the effect of treatment on self-reported wellbeing, reported here. METHODS: In this open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3, three-arm, Gynecologic Cancer Intergroup (GCIG) trial done at 117 hospital sites in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, South Korea, and Republic of Ireland, women (aged at least 18 years) with newly diagnosed, histologically confirmed International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics stage IC-IV ovarian cancer and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 were randomly assigned (1:1:1) centrally using minimisation to group 1 (intravenous carboplatin area under the curve [AUC]5 or AUC6 and 175 mg/m2 intravenous paclitaxel every 3 weeks), group 2 (carboplatin AUC5 or AUC6 every 3 weeks and 80 mg/m2 paclitaxel weekly), or group 3 (carboplatin AUC2 weekly and 80 mg/m2 paclitaxel weekly). Randomisation was stratified by GCIG group, disease stage, and outcome and timing of surgery. Patients and clinicians were not masked to treatment assignment. Patients underwent immediate or delayed primary surgery according to clinicians' choice. Patients were asked to complete European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 and QLQ-OV28 questionnaires at enrolment, before each chemotherapy cycle, then 6-weekly up to 9 months, 3-monthly up to 2 years, and 6-monthly up to 5 years. Quality of life was a prespecified secondary outcome of the ICON8 study. Within the quality-of-life study, the co-primary endpoints were QLQ-C30 global health score at 9 months (cross-sectional analysis) and mean QLQ-C30 global health score from randomisation to 9 months (longitudinal analysis). Data analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. The trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01654146 and ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN10356387, and is currently in long-term follow up. FINDINGS: Between June 6, 2011, and Nov 28, 2014, 1566 patients were recruited into ICON8 (522 were included in group 1, 523 in group 2, and 521 in group 3). Baseline quality-of-life questionnaires were completed by 1438 (92%) of 1566 patients and 9-month questionnaires by 882 (69%) of 1280 patients. We observed no significant difference in global health score at 9 months (cross-sectional analysis) between study groups (group 2 vs group 1, difference in mean score 2·3, 95% CI -0·4 to 4·9, p=0·095; group 3 vs group 1, -0·8, -3·8 to 2·2, p=0·61). Using longitudinal analysis, we found lower global health scores for those receiving weekly paclitaxel than for those receiving 3-weekly chemotherapy (group 2 vs group 1, mean difference -1·8, 95% CI -3·6 to -0·1, p=0·043; group 3 vs group 1, -2·9, -4·7 to -1·1, p=0·0018). INTERPRETATION: We found no evidence of a difference in global quality of life between treatment groups at 9 months; however, patients receiving weekly treatment reported lower mean quality of life across the 9-month period after randomisation. Taken together with the lack of progression-free survival benefit, these findings do not support routine use of weekly paclitaxel-containing regimens in the management of newly diagnosed ovarian cancer. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Medical Research Council, Health Research Board Ireland, Irish Cancer Society, and Cancer Australia

Effective delivery of Complex Innovative Design (CID) cancer trials—A consensus statement

The traditional cancer drug development pathway is increasingly being superseded by trials that address multiple clinical questions. These are collectively termed Complex Innovative Design (CID) trials. CID trials not only assess the safety and toxicity of novel anticancer medicines but also their efficacy in biomarker-selected patients, specific cancer cohorts or in combination with other agents. They can be adapted to include new cohorts and test additional agents within a single protocol. Whilst CID trials can speed up the traditional route to drug licencing, they can be challenging to design, conduct and interpret. The Experimental Cancer Medicine Centres (ECMC) network, funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Cancer Research UK (CRUK) and the Health Boards of Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland, formed a working group with relevant stakeholders from clinical trials units, the pharmaceutical industry, funding bodies, regulators and patients to identify the main challenges of CID trials. The working group generated ten consensus recommendations. These aim to improve the conduct, quality and acceptability of oncology CID trials in clinical research and, importantly, to expedite the process by which effective treatments can reach cancer patients

A phase Ib dose-finding, pharmacokinetic study of the focal adhesion kinase inhibitor GSK2256098 and trametinib in patients with advanced solid tumours

BACKGROUND: Combined focal adhesion kinase (FAK) and MEK inhibition may provide greater anticancer effect than FAK monotherapy. METHODS: This dose-finding phase Ib study (adaptive 3 + 3 design) determined the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of trametinib and the FAK inhibitor GSK2256098 in combination. Eligible patients had mesothelioma or other solid tumours with probable mitogen activated protein kinase pathway activation. Adverse events (AEs), dose-limiting toxicities, disease progression and pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics were analysed. RESULTS: Thirty-four subjects were enrolled. The GSK2256098/trametinib MTDs were 500 mg twice daily (BID)/0.375 mg once daily (QD) (high/low) and 250 mg BID/0.5 mg QD (low/high). The most common AEs were nausea, diarrhoea, decreased appetite, pruritus, fatigue and rash; none were grade 4. Systemic exposure to trametinib increased when co-administered with GSK2256098, versus trametinib monotherapy; GSK2256098 pharmacokinetics were unaffected by concomitant trametinib. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 11.8 weeks (95% CI: 6.1-24.1) in subjects with mesothelioma and was longer with Merlin-negative versus Merlin-positive tumours (15.0 vs 7.3 weeks). CONCLUSIONS: Trametinib exposure increased when co-administered with GSK2256098, but not vice versa. Mesothelioma patients with loss of Merlin had longer PFS than subjects with wild-type, although support for efficacy with this combination was limited. Safety profiles were acceptable up to the MTD

Mitosis Phase Enrichment with Identification of Mitotic Centromere-Associated Kinesin As a Therapeutic Target in Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

The recently described transcriptomic switch to a mitosis program in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) suggests that mitotic proteins may be rationally targeted at this lethal stage of the disease. In this study, we showed upregulation of the mitosis-phase at the protein level in our cohort of 51 clinical CRPC cases and found centrosomal aberrations to also occur preferentially in CRPC compared with untreated, high Gleason–grade hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (P<0.0001). Expression profiling of chemotherapy-resistant CRPC samples (n = 25) was performed, and the results were compared with data from primary chemotherapy-naïve CRPC (n = 10) and hormone-sensitive prostate cancer cases (n = 108). Our results showed enrichment of mitosis-phase genes and pathways, with progression to both castration-resistant and chemotherapy-resistant disease. The mitotic centromere-associated kinesin (MCAK) was identified as a novel mitosis-phase target in prostate cancer that was overexpressed in multiple CRPC gene-expression datasets. We found concordant gene expression of MCAK between our parent and murine CRPC xenograft pairs and increased MCAK protein expression with clinical progression of prostate cancer to a castration-resistant disease stage. Knockdown of MCAK arrested the growth of prostate cancer cells suggesting its utility as a potential therapeutic target

Plk1 regulates mitotic Aurora A function through βTrCP-dependent degradation of hBora

Polo-like kinase 1 (Plk1) and Aurora A play key roles in centrosome maturation, spindle assembly, and chromosome segregation during cell division. Here we show that the functions of these kinases during early mitosis are coordinated through Bora, a partner of Aurora A first identified in Drosophila. Depletion of human Bora (hBora) results in spindle defects, accompanied by increased spindle recruitment of Aurora A and its partner TPX2. Conversely, hBora overexpression induces mislocalization of Aurora A and monopolar spindle formation, reminiscent of the phenotype seen in Plk1-depleted cells. Indeed, Plk1 regulates hBora. Following Cdk1-dependent recruitment, Plk1 triggers hBora destruction by phosphorylating a recognition site for \documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\text{SCF}}^{{\text{ $ \beta $ - TrCP}}}$$\end{document}. Plk1 depletion or inhibition results in a massive accumulation of hBora, concomitant with displacement of Aurora A from spindle poles and impaired centrosome maturation, but remarkably, co-depletion of hBora partially restores Aurora A localization and bipolar spindle formation. This suggests that Plk1 controls Aurora A localization and function by regulating cellular levels of hBora