Gene Therapy for Pediatric Cancer: State of the Art and Future Perspectives.

While modern treatments have led to a dramatic improvement in survival for pediatric malignancy, toxicities are high and a significant proportion of patients remain resistant. Gene transfer offers the prospect of highly specific therapies for childhood cancer. "Corrective" genes may be transferred to overcome the genetic abnormalities present in the precancerous cell. Alternatively, genes can be introduced to render the malignant cell sensitive to therapeutic drugs. The tumor can also be attacked by decreasing its blood supply with genes that inhibit vascular growth. Another possible approach is to modify normal tissues with genes that make them more resistant to conventional drugs and/or radiation, thereby increasing the therapeutic index. Finally, it may be possible to attack the tumor indirectly by using genes that modify the behavior of the immune system, either by making the tumor more immunogenic, or by rendering host effector cells more efficient. Several gene therapy applications have already been reported for pediatric cancer patients in preliminary Phase 1 studies. Although no major clinical success has yet been achieved, improvements in gene delivery technologies and a better understanding of mechanisms of tumor progression and immune escape have opened new perspectives for the cure of pediatric cancer by combining gene therapy with standard therapeutic available treatments.

Chromosomal organization and evolutionary conservation of the human chromosome 19q linkage group containing three DNA repair genes

A series of human-rodent somatic cell hybrids were investigated by Southern blot analysis for the presence or absence of twenty-six molecular markers and three isozyme loci from human chromosome 19. Based on the co-retention of these markers in the various independent hybrid clones containing portions of human chromosome 19 and on pulsed field mapping, chromosome 19 is divided into twenty ordered regions. The most likely marker order for the chromosome is: (LDLR, C3)-(cen-MANNB)-D19S7-PEPD-D19S9-GPI-TGF$ \beta$-(CYP2A, NCA, CGM2, BCKAD)-PSG1a-(D19S8, XRCC1)-(D19S19, ATP1A3)-(D19S37, APOC2)-CKMM-ERCC2-ERCC1-(D19S62, D19S51)-D19S6-D19S50-D19S22-(CGB, FTL)-qter.^ The region of 19q between the proximal marker D19S7 and the distal gene coding for the beta subunit of chorionic gonadotropin (CGB) is about 37 Mb in size and covers about 37 cM genetic distance. The ration of genetic to physical distance on 19q is therefore very close to the genomic average OF 1 cM/Mb. Estimates of physical distances for intervals between chromosome 19 markers were calculated using a mapping function which estimates distances based on the number of breaks in hybrid clone panels. The consensus genetic distances between individual markers (established at HBM10) were compared to these estimates of physical distances. The close agreement between the two estimates suggested that spontaneously broken hybrids are as appropriate for this type of study as radiation hybrids.^ All three DNA repair genes located on chromosome 19 were found to have homologues on Chinese hamster chromosome 9, which is hemizygous in CHO cells, providing an explanation for the apparent ease with which mutations at these loci were identified in CHO cells. Homologues of CKMM and TGF$\beta$ (from human chromosome 19q) and a mini-satellite DNA specific to the distal region of human chromosome 19q were also mapped to Chinese hamster 9. Markers from 19p did not map to this hamster chromosome. Thus the q-arm of chromosome 19, at least between the genes PEPD and ERCC1, appears to be a linkage group which is conserved intact between humans and Chinese hamsters. ^

The imaging and dosimetric capabilities of a CT/MR-suitable, anatomically adaptive, shielded intracavitary brachytherapy applicator for the treatment of cervical cancer

Introduction. Investigations into the shortcomings of current intracavitary brachytherapy (ICBT) technology has lead us to design an Anatomically Adaptive Applicator (A3). The goal of this work was to design and characterize the imaging and dosimetric capabilities of this device. The A3 design incorporates a single shield that can both rotate and translate within the colpostat. We hypothesized that this feature, coupled with specific A3 component construction materials and imaging techniques, would facilitate artifact-free CT and MR image acquisition. In addition, by shaping the delivered dose distribution via the A3 movable shield, dose delivered to the rectum will be less compared to equivalent treatments utilizing current state-of-the-art ICBT applicators. ^ Method and materials. A method was developed to facilitate an artifact-free CT imaging protocol that used a "step-and-shoot" technique: pausing the scanner midway through the scan and moving the A 3 shield out of the path of the beam. The A3 CT imaging capabilities were demonstrated acquiring images of a phantom that positioned the A3 and FW applicators in a clinically-applicable geometry. Artifact-free MRI imaging was achieved by utilizing MRI-compatible ovoid components and pulse-sequences that minimize susceptibility artifacts. Artifacts were qualitatively compared, in a clinical setup. For the dosimetric study, Monte-Carlo (MC) models of the A3 and FW (shielded and unshielded) applicators were validated. These models were incorporated into a MC model of one cervical cancer patient ICBT insertion, using 192Ir (mHDR v2 source). The A3 shield's rotation and translation was adjusted for each dwell position to minimize dose to the rectum. Superposition of dose to rectum for all A3 dwell sources (4 per ovoid) was applied to obtain a comparison of equivalent FW treatments. Rectal dose-volume histograms (absolute and HDR/PDR biologically effective dose (BED)) and BED to 2 cc (BED2cc ) were determined for all applicators and compared. ^ Results. Using a "step-and-shoot" CT scanning method and MR compliant materials and optimized pulse-sequences, images of the A 3 were nearly artifact-free for both modalities. The A3 reduced BED2cc by 18.5% and 7.2% for a PDR treatment and 22.4% and 8.7% for a HDR treatment compared to treatments delivered using an uFW and sFW applicator, respectively. ^ Conclusions. The novel design of the A3 facilitated nearly artifact-free image quality for both CT and MR clinical imaging protocols. The design also facilitated a reduction in BED to the rectum compared to equivalent ICBT treatments delivered using current, state-of-the-art applicators. ^