Slug-dependent upregulation of L1CAM is responsible for the increased invasion potential of pancreatic cancer cells following long-term 5-FU treatment

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is a lethal disease with 5-year survival of less than 5%. 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) is a principal first-line therapy, but treatment only extends survival modestly and is seldom curative. Drug resistance and disease recurrence is typical and there is a pressing need to overcome this. To investigate acquired 5-FU resistance in pancreatic adenocarcinoma, we established chemoresistant monoclonal cell lines from the Panc 03.27 cell line by long-term exposure to increasing doses of 5-FU.

RESULTS: 5-FU-resistant cell lines exhibited increased expression of markers associated with multidrug resistance explaining their reduced sensitivity to 5-FU. In addition, 5-FU-resistant cell lines showed alterations typical for an epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT), including upregulation of mesenchymal markers and increased invasiveness. Microarray analysis revealed the L1CAM pathway as one of the most upregulated pathways in the chemoresistant clones, and a significant upregulation of L1CAM was seen on the RNA and protein level. In pancreatic cancer, expression of L1CAM is associated with a chemoresistant and migratory phenotype. Using esiRNA targeting L1CAM, or by blocking the extracellular part of L1CAM with antibodies, we show that the increased invasiveness observed in the chemoresistant cells functionally depends on L1CAM. Using esiRNA targeting β-catenin and/or Slug, we demonstrate that in the chemoresistant cell lines, L1CAM expression depends on Slug rather than β-catenin.

CONCLUSION: Our findings establish Slug-induced L1CAM expression as a mediator of a chemoresistant and migratory phenotype in pancreatic adenocarcinoma cells.

Molecular markers in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer

Although significant progress has been made in colorectal cancer (CRC) treatment within the last decade with the approval of multiple new agents, the prognosis for patients with metastatic CRC remains poor with 5-year survival rates of approximately 8%. Resistance to chemotherapy remains a major obstacle in effective CRC treatment and many patients do not receive any clinical benefit from chemotherapy. In addition, other patients will experience adverse reactions to treatment resulting in dose modifications or treatment withdrawal, which can severely reduce treatment efficacy. Currently, significant research efforts are attempting to identify reliable and validated biomarkers with which will guide clinicians to make more informed treatment decisions. Specifically, the use of molecular profiling has the potential to assist the clinician in administering the correct drug, dose, or intervention for the patient before the onset of therapy thereby selecting a treatment strategy likely to have the greatest clinical outcome while minimizing adverse events. However, until recently, personalized medicine is a paradigm that has existed more in conceptual terms than in reality with very few validated biomarkers used routinely in metastatic CRC treatment. Rapid advances in genomic, transcriptomic and proteomic technologies continues to improve our understanding of tumor biology, but the search for reliable biomarkers has turned out to be more challenging than previously anticipated with significant disparity in published literature and limited translation into routine clinical practice. Recent progress with the identification and validation of biomarkers to the anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibodies including KRAS and possibly BRAF provide optimism that the goal of individualized treatment is within reach. This review will highlight and discuss current progress in the search for biomarkers, the challenges this emerging field presents, and the future role of biomarkers in advancing CRC treatment.

Selecting the best targeted agent in first-line treatment of unresectable liver metastases from colorectal cancer:does the bench have the answers?

For physicians facing patients with organ-limited metastases from colorectal cancer, tumor shrinkage and sterilization of micrometastatic disease is the main goal, giving the opportunity for secondary surgical resection. At the same time, for the majority of patients who will not achieve a sufficient tumor response, disease control remains the predominant objective. Since FOLFOX or FOLFIRI have similar efficacies, the challenge is to define which could be the most effective targeted agent (anti-EGFR or anti-VEGF) to reach these goals. Therefore, a priori molecular identification of patients that could benefit from anti-EGFR or anti-VEGF monoclonal antibodies (i.e. the currently approved targeted therapies for metastatic colorectal cancer) is of critical importance. In this setting, the KRAS mutation status was the first identified predictive marker of response to anti-EGFR therapy. Since it has been demonstrated that tumors with KRAS mutation do not respond to anti-EGFR therapy, KRAS status must be determined prior to treatment. Thus, for KRAS wild-type patients, the choices that remain are either anti-VEGF or anti-EGFR. In this review, we present the most updated data from translational research programs dealing with the identification of biomarkers for response to targeted therapies.

Improving a regional chemotherapy service by learning from deaths occurring within 30 days of treatment with systemic anti-cancer therapy.

Background: Outwith clinical trials, patient outcomes specifically related to SACT (systemic anti-cancer therapy) are not well reported despite a significant proportion of patients receiving active treatment at the end of life. The NCEPOD reviewing deaths within 30 days of SACT found SACT caused or hastened death in 27% of cases.

Method: Across the Northern Ireland cancer network, 95 patients who died within 30 days of SACT for solid tumours were discussed at the Morbidity and Mortality monthly meeting during 2013. Using a structured template, each case was independently reviewed, with particular focus on whether SACT caused or hastened death.

Results: Lung, GI and breast cancers were the most common sites. Performance status was recorded in 92% at time of final SACT cycle (ECOG PS 0-2 89%).

In 57% the cause of death was progressive disease. Other causes included thromboembolism (13%) and infection (5% neutropenic sepsis, 6% non-neutropenic sepsis). In 26% with death from progressive disease, the patient was first cycle of first line treatment for metastatic disease. In the majority discussion regarding treatment aims and risks was documented. Only one patient was receiving SACT with curative intent, who died from appropriately managed neutropenic sepsis.

A definitive decision regarding SACT's role in death was made in 60%: in 49% SACT was deemed non-contributory and in 11% SACT was deemed the cause of death. In 40% SACT did not play a major role, but a definitive negative association could not be made.

Conclusion: Development of a robust review process of 30-day mortality after SACT established a benchmark for SACT delivery for future comparisons and identified areas for SACT service organisation improvement. Moreover it encourages individual practice reflection and highlights the importance of balancing patients' needs and concerns with realistic outcomes and risks, particularly in heavily pre-treated patients or those of poor performance status.

Quantification of HER2 heterogeneity in breast cancer-implications for identification of sub-dominant clones for personalised treatment

Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease, at both an inter- and intra-tumoural level. Appreciating heterogeneity through the application of biomarkers and molecular signatures adds complexity to tumour taxonomy but is key to personalising diagnosis, treatment and prognosis. The extent to which heterogeneity exists, and its interpretation remains a challenge to pathologists. Using HER2 as an exemplar, we have developed a simple reproducible heterogeneity index. Cell-to-cell HER2 heterogeneity was extensive in a proportion of both reported 'amplified' and 'non-amplified' cases. The highest levels of heterogeneity objectively identified occurred in borderline categories and higher ratio non-amplified cases. A case with particularly striking heterogeneity was analysed further with an array of biomarkers in order to assign a molecular diagnosis. Broad biological complexity was evident. In essence, interpretation, depending on the area of tumour sampled, could have been one of three distinct phenotypes, each of which would infer different therapeutic interventions. Therefore, we recommend that heterogeneity is assessed and taken into account when determining treatment options.

ARB: Phase II window of opportunity study of short-term preoperative treatment with enzalutamide in ER-positive and triple-negative breast cancer

The androgen receptor (AR) is expressed in 60-80% of breast cancers (BC) across all molecular phenotypes, with a higher incidence in oestrogen receptor positive (ER+) BC compared to ER negative tumours. In ER+ disease, AR-expression has been linked to endocrine resistance which might be reversed with combined treatment targeting ER and AR. In triple negative BCs (TNBC), preclinical and clinical investigations have described a subset of patients that express the AR and are sensitive to androgen blockade, providing a novel therapeutic target. Enzalutamide, a potent 2nd generation anti-androgen, has demonstrated substantial preclinical and clinical anti-tumour activity in AR+ breast cancer. Short-term preoperative window of opportunity studies are a validated strategy for novel treatments to provide proof-of-concept and define the most appropriate patient population by directly assessing treatment effects in tumour tissue before and after treatment. The ARB study aims to assess the anti-tumour effects of enzalutamide in early ER+ breast cancer and TNBC, to identify the optimal target population for further studies and to directly explore the biologic effects of enzalutamide on BC and stromal cells. Methods: ARB is an international, investigator sponsored WOO phase II study in women with newly diagnosed primary ER+ BC or AR+ TNBC of ≥ 1cm. The study has two cohorts. In the ER+ cohort, postmenopausal patients will be randomised 2:1 to receive either enzalutamide (160mg OD) plus exemestane (50mg OD) or exemestane (25mg OD). In the TNBC cohort, AR+ will receive single agent treatment with enzalutamide (160mg OD). Study treatment is planned for 15–29 days, followed by surgery or neo-adjuvant therapy. Tissue and blood samples are collected before treatment and on the last day of study treatment. The primary endpoint is inhibition of tumour-cell proliferation, as measured by change in Ki67 expression, determined centrally by 2 investigators. Secondary endpoints include induction of apoptosis (Caspase3), circulating hormone levels and safety. ARB aims to recruit ≈235 patients from ≈40 sites in the UK, Germany, Spain and USA. The study is open to recruitment.

Targeting treatment resistant breast cancer stem cells with FKBPL and its peptide derivative, AD-01

FKBPL and its peptide derivative, AD-01, have already demonstrated well-established inhibitory effects on breast cancer growth and CD44 dependent anti-angiogenic activity1, 2, 3. Since breast cancer stem cells (BCSCs) are CD44 positive, we wanted to explore if AD-01 could specifically target BCSCs. FKBPL stable overexpression or AD-01 treatment were highly effective at reducing the BCSC population measured by inhibiting mammosphere forming efficiency (MFE) in cell lines and primary breast cancer samples from both solid breast tumours and pleural effusions. Flow cytometry, to assess the ESA+/CD44+/CD24- subpopulation, validated these results. The ability of AD-01 to inhibit the self-renewal capacity of BCSCs was confirmed across three generations of mammospheres, where mammospheres were completely eradicated by the third generation (p<0.001). Clonogenic assays suggested that AD-01 mediated BCSC differentiation, with a significant decrease in the number of holoclones and an associated increase in meroclones/paraclones. In support of this, the stem cell markers, Nanog and Oct4 were significantly reduced following AD-01 treatment, whilst transfection of FKBPL-targeted siRNAs led to an increase in these markers and in mammosphere forming potential, highlighting the endogenous role of FKBPL in stem cell signalling. The clinical relevance of this was confirmed using a publically available microarray data set (GSE7390), where, high FKBPL and low Nanog expression were independently associated with improved overall survival in breast cancer patients (log rank test p=0.03; hazard ratio=3.01). When AD-01 was combined with other agents, we observed synergistic activity with the Notch inhibitor, DAPT and AD-01 was also able to abrogate a chemo- and radiotherapy induced enrichment in BCSCs. Importantly, using ‘gold standard’ in vivo limiting dilution assays we demonstrated a delay in tumour initiation and reoccurrence in AD-01 treated xenografts. In summary, AD-01 appears to have dual anti-angiogenic and anti-BCSC activity which will be advantageous as this agent enters clinical trial.

Targeting treatment resistant cancer stem cells with FKBPL and its peptide therapeutics

FKBPL and its peptide derivatives have already demonstrated well-established inhibitory effects on cancer growth and CD44-dependent anti-angiogenic activity. Since cancer stem cells (CSCs) are CD44 positive, we wanted to explore if these therapeutics could specifically target CSCs in breast and ovarian cancer. In a tumoursphere assay, FKBPL stable overexpression or FKBPL-based peptide (AD-01, preclinical peptide or ALM201, clinical peptide candidate) treatment were highly effective at reducing the CSC population measured by inhibiting tumoursphere forming efficiency in breast and ovarian cancer cell lines and primary breast cancer samples from both solid breast tumours and pleural effusions. Flow cytometry, to assess the ESA+/CD44+/CD24- and ALDH+ cell subpopulations representative of CSCs, validated these results. The ability of AD-01 and ALM201 to inhibit the self-renewal capacity of CSCs was confirmed across three generations, eradicating CSC completely by the third generation (p<0.001). Furthermore, clonogenic assay demonstrated that FKBPL-based peptides mediated CSC differentiation, with a significant decrease in the number of CSCs or holoclones and an associated increase in differentiated cancer cells or meroclones/paraclones. In addition, AD-01 treatment in vitro and in vivo led to a significant reduction in the stem cell markers, Nanog, Sox2 and Oct4 protein and mRNA levels; whilst transfection of FKBPL-targeted siRNAs led to an increase in these markers and in tumoursphere forming potential, highlighting the endogenous role of FKBPL in stem cell signalling. The clinical relevance of this was confirmed using a publically available microarray data set (GSE7390), where, high FKBPL and low Nanog expression were independently associated with improved overall survival in breast cancer patients (log rank test p=0.03; hazard ratio=3.01). Additionally, when AD-01 was combined with other agents, we observed additive activity with the Notch inhibitor, DAPT and AD-01 was also able to abrogate a chemo- and radiotherapy induced enrichment in CSCs. Importantly, using gold standard in vivo limiting dilution assays we demonstrated a delay in tumour initiation and reoccurrence in AD-01 treated xenografts. In summary, FKBPL-based peptides appear to have dual anti-angiogenic and anti-CSC activity which will be advantageous as this agent enters clinical trial.