Genomic modelling of the ESR1 Y537S mutation for evaluating function and new therapeutic approaches for metastatic breast cancer

Drugs that inhibit estrogen receptor-α (ER) activity have been highly successful in treating and reducing breast cancer progression in ER-positive disease. However, resistance to these therapies presents a major clinical problem. Recent genetic studies have shown that mutations in the ER gene are found in >20% of tumours that progress on endocrine therapies. Remarkably, the great majority of these mutations localize to just a few amino acids within or near the critical helix 12 region of the ER hormone binding domain, where they are likely to be single allele mutations. Understanding how these mutations impact on ER function is a prerequisite for identifying methods to treat breast cancer patients featuring such mutations. Towards this end, we used CRISPR-Cas9 genome editing to make a single allele knock-in of the most commonly mutated amino acid residue, tyrosine 537, in the estrogen-responsive MCF7 breast cancer cell line. Genomic analyses using RNA-seq and ER ChIP-seq demonstrated that the Y537S mutation promotes constitutive ER activity globally, resulting in estrogen-independent growth. MCF7-Y537S cells were resistant to the anti-estrogen tamoxifen and fulvestrant. Further, we show that the basal transcription factor TFIIH is constitutively recruited by ER-Y537S, resulting in ligand-independent phosphorylation of Serine 118 (Ser118) by the TFIIH kinase, cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK)7. The CDK7 inhibitor, THZ1 prevented Ser118 phosphorylation and inhibited growth of MCF7-Y537S cells. These studies confirm the functional importance of ER mutations in endocrine resistance, demonstrate the utility of knock-in mutational models for investigating alternative therapeutic approaches and highlight CDK7 inhibition as a potential therapy for endocrine-resistant breast cancer mediated by ER mutations

Second IVIg course in Guillain-Barré syndrome with poor prognosis. The non-randomised ISID study

Objective To compare disease course in patients with Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) with a poor prognosis who were treated with one or with two intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) courses. Methods From the International GBS Outcome Study, we selected patients whose modified Erasmus GBS Outcome Score at week 1 predicted a poor prognosis. We compared those treated with one IVIg course to those treated with two IVIg courses. The primary endpoint, the GBS disability scale at 4 weeks, was assessed with multivariable ordinal regression. Results Of 237 eligible patients, 199 patients received a single IVIg course. Twenty patients received an α early' second IVIg course (1-2 weeks after start of the first IVIg course) and 18 patients a α late' second IVIg course (2-4 weeks after start of IVIg). At baseline and 1 week, those receiving two IVIg courses were more disabled than those receiving one course. Compared with the one course group, the adjusted OR for a better GBS disability score at 4 weeks was 0.70 (95%CI 0.16 to 3.04) for the early group and 0.66 (95%CI 0.18 to 2.50) for the late group. The secondary endpoints were not in favour of a second IVIg course. Conclusions This observational study did not show better outcomes after a second IVIg course in GBS with poor prognosis. The study was limited by small numbers and baseline imbalances. Lack of improvement was likely an incentive to start a second IVIg course. A prospective randomised trial is needed to evaluate whether a second IVIg course improves outcome in GBS

Intravenous immunoglobulin treatment for mild Guillain-Barré syndrome. An international observational study

Objective: To compare the disease course in patients with mild Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) who were treated with intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) or supportive care only. Methods: We selected patients from the prospective observational International GBS Outcome Study (IGOS) who were able to walk independently at study entry (mild GBS), treated with one IVIg course or supportive care. The primary endpoint was the GBS disability score four weeks after study entry, assessed by multivariable ordinal regression analysis. Results: Of 188 eligible patients, 148 (79%) were treated with IVIg and 40 (21%) with supportive care. The IVIg group was more disabled at baseline. IVIg treatment was not associated with lower GBS disability scores at 4 weeks (adjusted OR (aOR) 1.62, 95% CI 0.63 to 4.13). Nearly all secondary endpoints showed no benefit from IVIg, although the time to regain full muscle strength was shorter (28 vs 56 days, p=0.03) and reported pain at 26 weeks was lower (n=26/121, 22% vs n=12/30, 40%, p=0.04) in the IVIg treated patients. In the subanalysis with persistent mild GBS in the first 2 weeks, the aOR for a lower GBS disability score at 4 weeks was 2.32 (95% CI 0.76 to 7.13). At 1 year, 40% of all patients had residual symptoms. Conclusion: In patients with mild GBS, one course of IVIg did not improve the overall disease course. The certainty of this conclusion is limited by confounding factors, selection bias and wide confidence limits. Residual symptoms were often present after one year, indicating the need for better treatments in mild GBS