Suppression of Aβ toxicity by puromycin-sensitive aminopeptidase is independent of its proteolytic activity.

The accumulation of β-amyloid (Aβ) peptide in the brain is one of the pathological hallmarks of Alzheimer's disease and is thought to be of primary aetiological significance. In an unbiased genetic screen, we identified puromycin-sensitive aminopeptidase (PSA) as a potent suppressor of Aβ toxicity in a Drosophila model system. We established that coexpression of Drosophila PSA (dPSA) in the flies' brains improved their lifespan, protected against locomotor deficits, and reduced brain Aβ levels by clearing the Aβ plaque-like deposits. However, confocal microscopy and subcellular fractionation of amyloid-expressing 7PA2 cells demonstrated that PSA localizes to the cytoplasm. Therefore, PSA and Aβ are unlikely to be in the same cellular compartment; moreover, when we artificially placed them in the same compartment in flies, we could not detect a direct epistatic interaction. The consequent hypothesis that PSA's suppression of Aβ toxicity is indirect was supported by the finding that Aβ is not a proteolytic substrate for PSA in vitro. Furthermore, we showed that the enzymatic activity of PSA is not required for rescuing Aβ toxicity in neuronal SH-SY5Y cells. We investigated whether the stimulation of autophagy by PSA was responsible for these protective effects. However PSA's promotion of autophagosome fusion with lysosomes required proteolytic activity and so its effect on autophagy is not identical to its protection against Aβ toxicity

Mechanisms of Primary and Secondary Resistance to Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Cancer

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICPis) have revolutionized cancer therapy with broad activities against a wide range of malignancies. However, in many malignancies their efficacy remains limited due to the primary resistance. Furthermore, a high percentage of patients develop progression due to the secondary resistance even after obtaining a response or achieving a stable disease. In this review, we will discuss the mechanisms that underlie the primary and secondary resistance to ICPis in cancer immunotherapy and provide an overview to impart a broad understanding of the critical issues that are encountered in clinical oncology practice

Fourteen-Day Gemcitabine-Docetaxel Chemotherapy Is Effective and Safer Compared to 21-Day Regimen in Patients with Advanced Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma

Gemcitabine-docetaxel (G-D) combination is an effective chemotherapy for patients with advanced soft tissue and bone sarcoma, first developed with G administered on days 1 and 8, and D on day 8 every 21 days and later modified to be administered every 14 days in 2012. The 14-day regimen has become increasingly adopted. However, its efficacy and toxicities have not been compared. We identified 161 patients with metastatic or locally advanced soft tissue and bone sarcoma treated with either a 14-day or 21-day regimen within Northern California Kaiser Permanente from 1 January 2017 to 30 July 2020 and compared the outcomes and toxicity profiles of patients treated with the either regimen. Seventy-nine (49%) and 82 (51%) patients received the 14-day and the 21-day regimen, respectively, with similar response rate (22.8% and 15.8%, p = 0.26), median progression-free survival (PFS, 4.0 and 3.2 months, p = 0.15), and median overall survival (OS, 12.6 and 14.7 months, p = 0.55). Subset analysis of the untreated patients (approximately 60% of the entire cohort) as well as the patients with leiomyosarcoma only (approximately 50% of the entire cohort) showed that OS was not significantly different between the two regimens. Febrile neutropenia requiring hospitalization occurred in 10 and one patients (p = 0.006) and intolerance leading to discontinuation of chemotherapy occurred in 12 and two patients (p = 0.006) treated with the 21-day and the 14-day regimens, respectively. CDKN2A deletion/mutation or CDK4 amplification was associated with worse median OS (p = 0.06), while a RB1 deletion/mutation was associated with better median PFS (p = 0.05), and these two genomic alterations were mutually exclusive. Our data demonstrate that, compared to the traditional 21-day G-D regimen, the 14-day G-D regimen is equally effective but safer. In addition, CDKN2A and RB1 pathways play significant role on the outcomes of the patients

Real-World Experiences with Pazopanib in Patients with Advanced Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma in Northern California

Background: Pazopanib was approved for advanced soft tissue sarcoma as a second- or third-line therapy based on the clinical trial “Pazopanib for metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma” (PALETTE). We hypothesized that the real-world experiences may be significantly different from the clinical trial results. Methods: We analyzed the response pattern of patients with advanced soft tissue and bone sarcoma who received pazopanib treatment between 1 January 2011 and 31 October 2018 in Kaiser Permanente Northern California. Results: A total of 123 patients with 23 different histologic subtypes were assessable. One patient with low-grade fibromyxoid sarcoma obtained complete response (CR) after 2 months of treatment with pazopanib, 12 patients (9.7%) obtained partial response (PR), 34 patients (27.6%) had stable disease (SD), while 76 patients (61.8%) developed progressive disease (PD). The disease control rate (DCR) was 46.3% (CR + PR + SD). Among the 12 patients with PR, 3 had undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcoma (UPS), 4 had leiomyosarcoma (LMS), 2 had pleomorphic rhabdomyosarcoma, 1 had pleomorphic liposarcoma, 1 had dedifferentiated liposarcoma, and 1 had angiosarcoma. The median duration of response was 9 months. Two patients with Ewing’s sarcoma had SD for 6 and 13 months, and two patients with osteosarcoma had SD for 6 and 9 months. Among 65 patients assessed at 8 weeks, 9 had a response, and 10 had SD. Among 104 patients assessed at 12 weeks, 12 had a response, and 26 had SD. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was approximately 3 months for all 123 cases and for patients with UPS and LMS. Conclusions: Our cohort of patients with advanced soft tissue and bone sarcoma in Northern California treated with pazopanib had diverse histologic subtypes. The response rate (CR + PR) was higher than that of the PALETTE trial, while the DCR and the median PFS were significantly lower. The observation of PR in two patients with liposarcoma and durable SD in several patients with bone sarcoma indicates that pazopanib has activity in liposarcoma and bone sarcoma