Therapy for metastatic melanoma: the past, present, and future

Metastatic melanoma is the most aggressive form of skin cancer with a median overall survival of less than one year. Advancements in our understanding of how melanoma evades the immune system as well as the recognition that melanoma is a molecularly heterogeneous disease have led to major improvements in the treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma. In 2011, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved two novel therapies for advanced melanoma: a BRAF inhibitor, vemurafenib, and an immune stimulatory agent, ipilimumab. The success of these agents has injected excitement and hope into patients and clinicians and, while these therapies have their limitations, they will likely provide excellent building blocks for the next generation of therapies. In this review we will discuss the advantages and limitations of the two new approved agents, current clinical trials designed to overcome these limitations, and future clinical trials that we feel hold the most promise

Narrowing the knowledge gaps for melanoma

Cutaneous melanoma originates from pigment producing melanocytes or their precursors and is considered the deadliest form of skin cancer. For the last 40 years, few treatment options were available for patients with late-stage melanoma. However, remarkable advances in the therapy field were made recently, leading to the approval of two new drugs, the mutant BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib and the immunostimulant ipilimumab. Although these drugs prolong patients' lives, neither drug cures the disease completely, emphasizing the need for improvements of current therapies. Our knowledge about the complex genetic and biological mechanisms leading to melanoma development has increased, but there are still gaps in our understanding of the early events of melanocyte transformation and disease progression. In this review, we present a summary of the main contributing factors leading to melanocyte transformation and discuss recent novel findings and technologies that will help answer some of the key biological melanoma questions and lay the groundwork for novel therapies

Defensive coping and health-related quality of life in chronic kidney disease: a cross-sectional study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Coping with the stresses of chronic disease is considered as a key factor in the perceived impairment of health related quality of life (HRQL). Little is known though about these associations in chronic kidney disease (CKD). The present study aimed to investigate the relationship of defensive coping and HRQL among patients in different CKD stages, after adjusting for psychological distress, sociodemographic and disease-related variables.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The sample consisted of 98 CKD patients, attending a university nephrology department. Seventy-nine (79) pre-dialysis patients of disease stages 3 to 4 and 19 dialysis patients were included. HRQL was assessed by the 36-item Short-Form health survey (SF-36), defensive coping by the Rationality/Emotional Defensiveness (R/ED) scale of the Lifestyle Defense Mechanism Inventory (LDMI) and psychological distress by the depression and anxiety scales of the revised Hopkins Symptom CheckList (SCL-90-R). Regression analyses were carried out to examine the association between SF-36 dimensions and defensive coping style.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Patients on dialysis had worse scores on SF-36 scales measuring physical aspects of HRQL. In the fully adjusted analysis, a higher defensive coping score was significantly associated with a lower score on the mental component summary (MCS) scale of the SF-36 (worse mental health). In contrast, a higher defensive score showed a small positive association with the physical component summary (PCS) scale of the SF-36 (better health), but this was marginally significant.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The results provided evidence that emotional defensiveness as a coping style tends to differentially affect the mental and the physical component of HRQL in CKD. Clinicians should be aware of the effects of long-term denial and could examine the possibility of screening for defensive coping and depression in recently diagnosed CKD patients with the aim to improve both physical and mental health.</p

Somatic p16INK4a loss accelerates melanomagenesis

Loss of p16INK4a–RB and ARF–p53 tumor suppressor pathways, as well as activation of RAS–RAF signaling, is seen in a majority of human melanomas. Although heterozygous germline mutations of p16INK4a are associated with familial melanoma, most melanomas result from somatic genetic events: often p16INK4a loss and N-RAS or B-RAF mutational activation, with a minority possessing alternative genetic alterations such as activating mutations in K-RAS and/or p53 inactivation. To generate a murine model of melanoma featuring some of these somatic genetic events, we engineered a novel conditional p16INK4a-null allele and combined this allele with a melanocyte-specific, inducible CRE recombinase strain, a conditional p53-null allele and a loxP-stop-loxP activatable oncogenic K-Ras allele. We found potent synergy between melanocyte-specific activation of K-Ras and loss of p16INK4a and/or p53 in melanomagenesis. Mice harboring melanocyte-specific activated K-Ras and loss of p16INK4a and/or p53 developed invasive, unpigmented and nonmetastatic melanomas with short latency and high penetrance. In addition, the capacity of these somatic genetic events to rapidly induce melanomas in adult mice suggests that melanocytes remain susceptible to transformation throughout adulthood

Integrative Analysis of Epigenetic Modulation in Melanoma Cell Response to Decitabine: Clinical Implications

Decitabine, an epigenetic modifier that reactivates genes otherwise suppressed by DNA promoter methylation, is effective for some, but not all cancer patients, especially those with solid tumors. It is commonly recognized that to overcome resistance and improve outcome, treatment should be guided by tumor biology, which includes genotype, epigenotype, and gene expression profile. We therefore took an integrative approach to better understand melanoma cell response to clinically relevant dose of decitabine and identify complementary targets for combined therapy. We employed eight different melanoma cell strains, determined their growth, apoptotic and DNA damage responses to increasing doses of decitabine, and chose a low, clinically relevant drug dose to perform whole-genome differential gene expression, bioinformatic analysis, and protein validation studies. The data ruled out the DNA damage response, demonstrated the involvement of p21Cip1 in a p53-independent manner, identified the TGFβ pathway genes CLU and TGFBI as markers of sensitivity to decitabine and revealed an effect on histone modification as part of decitabine-induced gene expression. Mutation analysis and knockdown by siRNA implicated activated β-catenin/MITF, but not BRAF, NRAS or PTEN mutations as a source for resistance. The importance of protein stability predicted from the results was validated by the synergistic effect of Bortezomib, a proteasome inhibitor, in enhancing the growth arrest of decitabine in otherwise resistant melanoma cells. Our integrative analysis show that improved therapy can be achieved by comprehensive analysis of cancer cells, identified biomarkers for patient's selection and monitoring response, as well as targets for improved combination therapy

Differentiation of breast cancer stem cells by knockdown of CD44: promising differentiation therapy

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Breast cancer stem cells (BCSCs) are the source of breast tumors. Compared with other cancer cells, cancer stem cells show high resistance to both chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Targeting of BCSCs is thus a potentially promising and effective strategy for breast cancer treatment. Differentiation therapy represents one type of cancer stem-cell-targeting therapy, aimed at attacking the stemness of cancer stem cells, thus reducing their chemo- and radioresistance. In a previous study, we showed that down-regulation of CD44 sensitized BCSCs to the anti-tumor agent doxorubicin. This study aimed to determine if CD44 knockdown caused BCSCs to differentiate into breast cancer non-stem cells (non-BCSCs).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We isolated a breast cancer cell population (CD44⁺CD24^-cells) from primary cultures of malignant breast tumors. These cells were sorted into four sub-populations based on their expression of CD44 and CD24 surface markers. CD44 knockdown in the BCSC population was achieved using small hairpin RNA lentivirus particles. The differentiated status of CD44 knock-down BCSCs was evaluated on the basis of changes in CD44⁺CD24^-phenotype, tumorigenesis in NOD/SCID mice, and gene expression in relation to renewal status, metastasis, and cell cycle in comparison with BCSCs and non-BCSCs.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Knockdown of CD44 caused BCSCs to differentiate into non-BCSCs with lower tumorigenic potential, and altered the cell cycle and expression profiles of some stem cell-related genes, making them more similar to those seen in non-BCSCs.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Knockdown of CD44 is an effective strategy for attacking the stemness of BCSCs, resulting in a loss of stemness and an increase in susceptibility to chemotherapy or radiation. The results of this study highlight a potential new strategy for breast cancer treatment through the targeting of BCSCs.</p

Birth after caesarean study – planned vaginal birth or planned elective repeat caesarean for women at term with a single previous caesarean birth: protocol for a patient preference study and randomised trial

Background: For women who have a caesarean section in their preceding pregnancy, two care policies for birth are considered standard: planned vaginal birth and planned elective repeat caesarean. Currently available information about the benefits and harms of both forms of care are derived from retrospective and prospective cohort studies. There have been no randomised trials, and recognising the deficiencies in the literature, there have been calls for methodologically rigorous studies to assess maternal and infant health outcomes associated with both care policies. The aims of our study are to assess in women with a previous caesarean birth, who are eligible in the subsequent pregnancy for a vaginal birth, whether a policy of planned vaginal birth after caesarean compared with a policy of planned repeat caesarean affects the risk of serious complications for the woman and her infant. Methods/Design Design: Multicentred patient preference study and a randomised clinical trial. Inclusion Criteria: Women with a single prior caesarean presenting in their next pregnancy with a single, live fetus in cephalic presentation, who have reached 37 weeks gestation, and who do not have a contraindication to a planned VBAC. Trial Entry & Randomisation: Eligible women will be given an information sheet during pregnancy, and will be recruited to the study from 37 weeks gestation after an obstetrician has confirmed eligibility for a planned vaginal birth. Written informed consent will be obtained. Women who consent to the patient preference study will be allocated their preference for either planned VBAC or planned, elective repeat caesarean. Women who consent to the randomised trial will be randomly allocated to either the planned vaginal birth after caesarean or planned elective repeat caesarean group. Treatment Groups: Women in the planned vaginal birth group will await spontaneous onset of labour whilst appropriate. Women in the elective repeat caesarean group will have this scheduled for between 38 and 40 weeks. Primary Study Outcome: Serious adverse infant outcome (death or serious morbidity). Sample Size: 2314 women in the patient preference study to show a difference in adverse neonatal outcome from 1.6% to 3.6% (p = 0.05, 80% power).Jodie M Dodd, Caroline A Crowther, Janet E Hiller, Ross R Haslam and Jeffrey S Robinso