Cellular FLICE-inhibitory protein regulates chemotherapy-induced apoptosis in breast cancer cells

Combination treatment regimens that include topoisomerase-II-targeted drugs, such as doxorubicin, are widely used in the treatment of breast cancer. Previously, we demonstrated that IFN-� and doxorubicin co-treatment synergistically induced apoptosis in MDA435 breast cancer cells in a STAT1-dependent manner. In this study, we found that this synergy was caspase 8-dependent. In addition, we found that IFN-γ down-regulated the expression of the caspase 8 inhibitor c-FLIP. Furthermore, IFN-� down-regulated c-FLIP in a manner that was dependent on the transcription factors STAT1 and IRF1. However, IFN-� had no effect on c-FLIP mRNA levels, indicating that c-FLIP was down-regulated at a post-transcriptional level following IFN-� treatment. Characterisation of the functional significance of c-FLIP modulation by siRNA gene silencing and stable over-expression studies, revealed it to be a key regulator of IFN-γ- and doxorubicin-induced apoptosis in MDA435 cells. Analysis of a panel of breast cancer cell lines indicated that c-FLIP was an important general determinant of doxorubicin- and IFN-�-induced apoptosis in breast cancer cells. Furthermore, c-FLIP gene silencing sensitised MDA435 cells to other chemotherapies, including etoposide, mitoxantrone and SN-38. These results suggest that c-FLIP plays a pivotal role in modulating drug-induced apoptosis in breast cancer cells.

Evaluation of the antiangiogenic potential of AQ4N.

Purpose: A number of cytotoxic chemotherapy agents tested at low concentrations show antiangiogenic properties with limited cytotoxicity, e.g., cyclophosphamide, tirapazamine, and mitoxantrone. AQ4N is a bioreductive alkylaminoanthraquinone that is cytotoxic when reduced to AQ4; hence, it can be used to target hypoxic tumor cells. AQ4N is structurally similar to mitoxantrone and was evaluated for antiangiogenic properties without the need for bioreduction.

Experimental Design:The effect of AQ4N and fumagillin on human microvascular endothelial cells (HMEC-1) was measured using a variety ofin vitro assays, i.e., 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)- 2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide, wound scrape, tubule formation, rat aortic ring, and invasion assays. Low-dose AQ4N (20 mg/kg) was also given in vivo to mice bearing a tumor in a dorsal skin flap.

Results:AQ4N (10-11to10-5mol/L) hadno effect on HMEC-1viability. AQ4N (10-9to10-5mol/L) caused a sigmoidal dose-dependent inhibition of endothelial cell migration in the wound scrape model. Fumagillin showed a similar response over a lower dose range (10-13 to 10-9 mol/L); however, the maximal inhibition was less (25% versus 43% for AQ4N). AQ4N inhibited HMEC-1 cell contacts on Matrigel (10-8 to 10-5 mol/L), HMEC-1 cell invasion, and sprouting in rat aorta explants. Immunofluorescence staining with tubulin, vimentim, dynein, and phalloidin revealed that AQ4N caused disruption to the cell cytoskeleton. When AQ4N (20 mg/kg) was given in vivo for 5 days, microvessels disappeared in LNCaP tumors grown in a dorsal skin flap.

Conclusions:This combination of assays has shown that AQ4N possesses antiangiogenic effects in normoxic conditions, which could potentially contribute to antitumor activity

Arsenic trioxide and all-trans retinoic acid treatment for acute promyelocytic leukaemia in all risk groups (AML17): results of a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND: Acute promyelocytic leukaemia is a chemotherapy-sensitive subgroup of acute myeloid leukaemia characterised by the presence of the PML-RARA fusion transcript. The present standard of care, chemotherapy and all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA), results in a high proportion of patients being cured. In this study, we compare a chemotherapy-free ATRA and arsenic trioxide treatment regimen with the standard chemotherapy-based regimen (ATRA and idarubicin) in both high-risk and low-risk patients with acute promyelocytic leukaemia.

METHODS: In the randomised, controlled, multicentre, AML17 trial, eligible patients (aged ≥16 years) with acute promyelocytic leukaemia, confirmed by the presence of the PML-RARA transcript and without significant cardiac or pulmonary comorbidities or active malignancy, and who were not pregnant or breastfeeding, were enrolled from 81 UK hospitals and randomised 1:1 to receive treatment with ATRA and arsenic trioxide or ATRA and idarubicin. ATRA was given to participants in both groups in a daily divided oral dose of 45 mg/m(2) until remission, or until day 60, and then in a 2 weeks on-2 weeks off schedule. In the ATRA and idarubicin group, idarubicin was given intravenously at 12 mg/m(2) on days 2, 4, 6, and 8 of course 1, and then at 5 mg/m(2) on days 1-4 of course 2; mitoxantrone at 10 mg/m(2) on days 1-4 of course 3, and idarubicin at 12 mg/m(2) on day 1 of the final (fourth) course. In the ATRA and arsenic trioxide group, arsenic trioxide was given intravenously at 0·3 mg/kg on days 1-5 of each course, and at 0·25 mg/kg twice weekly in weeks 2-8 of course 1 and weeks 2-4 of courses 2-5. High-risk patients (those presenting with a white blood cell count >10 × 10(9) cells per L) could receive an initial dose of the immunoconjugate gemtuzumab ozogamicin (6 mg/m(2) intravenously). Neither maintenance treatment nor CNS prophylaxis was given to patients in either group. All patients were monitored by real-time quantitative PCR. Allocation was by central computer minimisation, stratified by age, performance status, and de-novo versus secondary disease. The primary endpoint was quality of life on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 global health status. All analyses are by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number ISRCTN55675535.

FINDINGS: Between May 8, 2009, and Oct 3, 2013, 235 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to ATRA and idarubicin (n=119) or ATRA and arsenic trioxide (n=116). Participants had a median age of 47 years (range 16-77; IQR 33-58) and included 57 high-risk patients. Quality of life did not differ significantly between the treatment groups (EORTC QLQ-C30 global functioning effect size 2·17 [95% CI -2·79 to 7·12; p=0·39]). Overall, 57 patients in the ATRA and idarubicin group and 40 patients in the ATRA and arsenic trioxide group reported grade 3-4 toxicities. After course 1 of treatment, grade 3-4 alopecia was reported in 23 (23%) of 98 patients in the ATRA and idarubicin group versus 5 (5%) of 95 in the ATRA and arsenic trioxide group, raised liver alanine transaminase in 11 (10%) of 108 versus 27 (25%) of 109, oral toxicity in 22 (19%) of 115 versus one (1%) of 109. After course 2 of treatment, grade 3-4 alopecia was reported in 25 (28%) of 89 patients in the ATRA and idarubicin group versus 2 (3%) of 77 in the ATRA and arsenic trioxide group; no other toxicities reached the 10% level. Patients in the ATRA and arsenic trioxide group had significantly less requirement for most aspects of supportive care than did those in the ATRA and idarubicin group.

INTERPRETATION: ATRA and arsenic trioxide is a feasible treatment in low-risk and high-risk patients with acute promyelocytic leukaemia, with a high cure rate and less relapse than, and survival not different to, ATRA and idarubicin, with a low incidence of liver toxicity. However, no improvement in quality of life was seen.

Cabazitaxel for Hormone-Relapsed Metastatic Prostate Cancer Previously Treated With a Docetaxel-Containing Regimen: An Evidence Review Group Perspective of a NICE Single Technology Appraisal

As part of its single technology appraisal (STA) process, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) invited the company that manufactures cabazitaxel (Jevtana(®), Sanofi, UK) to submit evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of cabazitaxel for treatment of patients with metastatic hormone-relapsed prostate cancer (mHRPC) previously treated with a docetaxel-containing regimen. The School of Health and Related Research Technology Appraisal Group at the University of Sheffield was commissioned to act as the independent Evidence Review Group (ERG). The ERG produced a critical review of the evidence for the clinical and cost effectiveness of the technology based upon the company's submission to NICE. Clinical evidence for cabazitaxel was derived from a multinational randomised open-label phase III trial (TROPIC) of cabazitaxel plus prednisone or prednisolone compared with mitoxantrone plus prednisone or prednisolone, which was assumed to represent best supportive care. The NICE final scope identified a further three comparators: abiraterone in combination with prednisone or prednisolone; enzalutamide; and radium-223 dichloride for the subgroup of people with bone metastasis only (no visceral metastasis). The company did not consider radium-223 dichloride to be a relevant comparator. Neither abiraterone nor enzalutamide has been directly compared in a trial with cabazitaxel. Instead, clinical evidence was synthesised within a network meta-analysis (NMA). Results from TROPIC showed that cabazitaxel was associated with a statistically significant improvement in both overall survival and progression-free survival compared with mitoxantrone. Results from a random-effects NMA, as conducted by the company and updated by the ERG, indicated that there was no statistically significant difference between the three active treatments for both overall survival and progression-free survival. Utility data were not collected as part of the TROPIC trial, and were instead taken from the company's UK early access programme. Evidence on resource use came from the TROPIC trial, supplemented by both expert clinical opinion and a UK clinical audit. List prices were used for mitoxantrone, abiraterone and enzalutamide as directed by NICE, although commercial in-confidence patient-access schemes (PASs) are in place for abiraterone and enzalutamide. The confidential PAS was used for cabazitaxel. Sequential use of the advanced hormonal therapies (abiraterone and enzalutamide) does not usually occur in clinical practice in the UK. Hence, cabazitaxel could be used within two pathways of care: either when an advanced hormonal therapy was used pre-docetaxel, or when one was used post-docetaxel. The company believed that the former pathway was more likely to represent standard National Health Service (NHS) practice, and so their main comparison was between cabazitaxel and mitoxantrone, with effectiveness data from the TROPIC trial. Results of the company's updated cost-effectiveness analysis estimated a probabilistic incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of £45,982 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, which the committee considered to be the most plausible value for this comparison. Cabazitaxel was estimated to be both cheaper and more effective than abiraterone. Cabazitaxel was estimated to be cheaper but less effective than enzalutamide, resulting in an ICER of £212,038 per QALY gained for enzalutamide compared with cabazitaxel. The ERG noted that radium-223 is a valid comparator (for the indicated sub-group), and that it may be used in either of the two care pathways. Hence, its exclusion leads to uncertainty in the cost-effectiveness results. In addition, the company assumed that there would be no drug wastage when cabazitaxel was used, with cost-effectiveness results being sensitive to this assumption: modelling drug wastage increased the ICER comparing cabazitaxel with mitoxantrone to over £55,000 per QALY gained. The ERG updated the company's NMA and used a random effects model to perform a fully incremental analysis between cabazitaxel, abiraterone, enzalutamide and best supportive care using PASs for abiraterone and enzalutamide. Results showed that both cabazitaxel and abiraterone were extendedly dominated by the combination of best supportive care and enzalutamide. Preliminary guidance from the committee, which included wastage of cabazitaxel, did not recommend its use. In response, the company provided both a further discount to the confidential PAS for cabazitaxel and confirmation from NHS England that it is appropriate to supply and purchase cabazitaxel in pre-prepared intravenous-infusion bags, which would remove the cost of drug wastage. As a result, the committee recommended use of cabazitaxel as a treatment option in people with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 whose disease had progressed during or after treatment with at least 225 mg/m(2) of docetaxel, as long as it was provided at the discount agreed in the PAS and purchased in either pre-prepared intravenous-infusion bags or in vials at a reduced price to reflect the average per-patient drug wastage.