Objective: In this study, we aimed to examine the effect of MAN on human lung cancer and reveal the underlying molecular mechanism.
Methods: MTT assay was conducted to measure cell viability. Annexin V-FITC/PI staining was used to detect cell apoptosis. Confocal microscope was performed to determine the formation of autophagosomes and autolysosomes. Flow cytometry was performed to quantify cell death. Western blotting was used to determine the related-signaling pathway.
Results: In the present study, we demonstrated for the first time that MAN inhibitd cell proliferation and induced cell apoptosis in human non-small-cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) cells. We found that MAN treatment dysregulated mitochondrial function and led to mitochondrial apoptosis in A549 and PC9 cells. Meanwhile, MAN enhanced autophagy flux by the increase of autophagosome formation, the fusion of autophagsomes and lysosomes and lysosomal function. Moreover, mTOR signaling pathway, a classical pathway regualting autophagy, was inhibited by MAN in a time- and dose-dependent mannner, resulting in autophagy induction. Interestingly, autophagy inhibition by CQ or Atg5 knockdown attenuated cell apoptosis by MAN, indicating that autophagy serves as cell death. Furthermore, autophagy-mediated cell death by MAN can be blocked by reactive oxygen species (ROS) scavenger NAC, indicating that ROS accumulation is the inducing factor of apoptosis and autophagy. In summary, we revealed the molecular mechanism of MAN against lung cancer through apoptosis and autophagy, suggesting that MAN might be a novel therapeutic agent for NSCLC treatment.
Methods: We searched PubMed-MEDLINE, Embase and Scopus, from inception to 20 Sep 2019, and reviewed major conferences' abstracts, for randomised controlled trials of ICI in advanced-stage NSCLC (Stage IIIB or IV) without EGFR mutation that reported hazard ratios (HRs) stratified by geographical region including the region "Asia" or "East Asia". The primary outcome measures were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). The pooled HR and its 95% confidence interval (CI) for OS and PFS in East Asians and non-East Asians were calculated using a random effect model and the difference compared using an interaction test.
Results: A total of 5,465 patients from 7 randomised controlled trials involving CTLA-4 and/or PD-1/L1 inhibitors were included, with 1,740 (32%) East Asians and 3,725 (68%) non-East Asians. ICI was associated with an improvement in OS and PFS for both East Asian (OS HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.65-0.85; PFS HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.40-0.79) and non-East Asian patients (OS HR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.72-0.85; PFS HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56-0.85), with no significant difference between the two groups (Pinteraction=0.55 for OS; Pinteraction=0.33 for PFS). Subgroup analyses showed a statistically significant superior PFS (but not OS) for East Asians than non-East Asians in trials that used immune checkpoint inhibitor in the first-line treatment (Pinteraction=0.02). No significant regional difference was found in further subgroups of pure ICI and combination of ICI with chemotherapy.
Conclusions: There is no significant difference in response to ICI between East Asians and non-East Asians with advanced stage NSCLC, and the statistically significant subgroup difference in PFS in the first line use of ICI may not be clinically significant.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients diagnosed with adenocarcinoma of the lung between 2010 and 2014 were tested for EGFR mutations. Of these, 92 cases were identified as EGFR wild type and suitable candidates for ALK testing utilising immunohistochemistry and the rabbit monoclonal antibody D5F3. The reliability of the IHC was confirmed by validating the results against those achieved by fluorescence in situ hybridisation (FISH) to detect ALK gene rearrangements.
RESULTS: Twelve (13%) cases were positive for ALK expression using immunohistochemistry. Of the 18 evaluable cases tested by FISH, there was 100% agreement with respect to ALK rearrangement/ALK expression between the assays, with 11 cases ALK negative and 7 cases ALK positive by both assays. ALK tumour expression was significantly more common in female compared to male patients (29.6% vs. 6.2%, P
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two EGFR mutation tests, a tissue-based assay (cobas® v1) and a tissue- and blood-based assay (cobas® v2) were used to analyze matched biopsy and blood samples (897 paired samples) from three Asian studies of first-line erlotinib with similar intent-to-treat populations. ENSURE was a phase III comparison of erlotinib and gemcitabine/platinum, FASTACT-2 was a phase III study of gemcitabine/platinum plus erlotinib or placebo, and ASPIRATION was a single-arm phase II study of erlotinib. Agreement statistics were evaluated, based on sensitivity and specificity between the two assays in subgroups of patients with increasing tumor burden.
RESULTS: Patients with discordant EGFR (tissue+/plasma-) mutation status achieved longer progression-free and overall survival than those with concordant (tissue+/plasma+) mutation status. Tumor burden was significantly greater in patients with concordant versus discordant mutations. Pooled analyses of data from the three studies showed a sensitivity of 72.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 67.8-76.1) and a specificity of 97.9% (95% CI 96.0-99.0) for blood-based testing; sensitivity was greatest in patients with larger baseline tumors.
CONCLUSIONS: Blood-based EGFR mutation testing demonstrated high specificity and good sensitivity, and offers a convenient and easily accessible diagnostic method to complement tissue-based tests. Patients with a discordant mutation status in plasma and tissue, had improved survival outcomes compared with those with a concordant mutation status, which may be due to their lower tumor burden. These data help to inform the clinical utility of this blood-based assay for the detection of EGFR mutations.
RESULTS: All of the mutations were found in adenocarcinoma, except one that was in squamous cell carcinoma. The mutation rate was 45.7% (221/484). Complex mutations were also observed, wherein 8 tumours carried 2 mutations and 1 tumour carried 3 mutations.
CONCLUSIONS: Both methods detected EGFR mutations in FFPE samples. HRM assays gave more EGFR positive results compared to Scorpion ARMS.