METHODS: The retrospective arm (2011-2014) included adults with metastatic colorectal cancer who had initiated first-line therapy with ≥1 post-baseline visit and survival data. The prospective arm (2014-2019) enrolled newly diagnosed patients with histologically proven metastatic colorectal cancer with ≥1 measurable lesion per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, and tissue availability for biomarker analysis. Data look-back and follow-up were 2 years; the rate of RAS mutation was evaluated.
RESULTS: RAS testing was ordered for patients in retrospective (326/417) and prospective (407/500) studies. In the former, testing was typically prescribed after first-line treatment initiation, significantly more in patients with stage IV disease (P < .005), resulting in the addition of targeted therapy (41.8% anti-epidermal growth factor receptor, 30.2% anti-vascular endothelial growth factor) in wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer, and significantly impacted the treatment of left-sided tumors (P = .037). In the latter, 58.4% were RAS wild-type; 41.6% were RAS mutant. Non-prescription of RAS testing was attributed to test unavailability, financial, or medical rea sons; predictors of testing prescription were older age, primary tumor in ascending colon, and high tumor grade. RAS status knowledge resulted in the addition of anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (20.4%) or anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy (21.2%).
CONCLUSION: Before 2014, RAS testing in patients with colorectal cancer in the Middle East and North Africa was often performed after first-line treatment. Testing is more routine in newly diagnosed patients, potentially shifting early treatment patterns.
METHODS: 79 patients with DLBCL (nodal, 59% and extranodal, 41%) treated with rituximab combined with cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone (R-CHOP) therapy were selected. Expression levels of BCR and linked signalling pathway molecules were inter-related with Lymph2Cx-based cell of origin (COO) types and overall survival (OS).
RESULTS: Activated B-cell (ABC) type DLBCL constituted 49% (39/79) compared with germinal centre B-cell (GCB) type DLBCL (29/79; 37%) and revealed poor prognosis (p=0.013). In ABC-DLBCL, high BTK expression exerted poor response to R-CHOP, while OS in ABC-DLBCL with low BTK expression was similar to GCB-DLBCL subtype (p=0.004). High LYN expression coupled with a poor OS for ABC-DLBCL as well as GCB-DLBCL subtypes (p=0.001). Furthermore, high coexpression of BTK/LYN (BTKhigh/LYNhigh) showed poor OS (p=0.019), which linked with upregulation of several genes associated with BCR repertoire and nuclear factor-kappa B pathway (p<0.01). In multivariate analysis, high BTK and LYN expression retained prognostic significance against established clinical predictive factors such as age, International Prognostic Index and COO (p<0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Our data provide a clear association between high BCR activity in DLBCL and response to therapy in a distinct population. Molecular data provided here will pave the pathway for the provision of promising novel-targeted therapies to patients with DLBCL in Southeast Asia.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Considering the ability of SCS to also promote the activity of the antiestrogen, tamoxifen, we further examined the effect of SCS in modulating cell cycle progression and related proteins in MCF-7 and MDA-MB-231 cells alone and in combination with tamoxifen. Expression of cell cycle- related transcripts was analysed based on a previous microarray dataset.
RESULTS: SCS significantly caused G1 arrest of both types of cells, similar to tamoxifen and this was associated with modulation of cyclin D1, p21 and p53. In combination with tamoxifen, the anticancer effects involved downregulation of ERα protein in MCF-7 cells but appeared independent of an ER-mediated mechanism in MDA-MB-231 cells. Microarray data analysis confirmed the clinical relevance of the proteins studied.
CONCLUSIONS: The current data suggest that SCS growth inhibitory effects are similar to that of the antiestrogen, tamoxifen, further supporting the previously demonstrated cytotoxic and apoptotic actions of both agents.
METHODS: We carried a review of medical records of breast and lung cancer patients hospitalized in years 2003 and 2009 at Penang General Hospital, a public tertiary care center in Penang Island, north of Malaysia. Patients with hypercalcemia (defined as a calcium level above 10.5 mg/dl) at the time of cancer diagnosis or during cancer treatment had their medical history abstracted, including presence of metastasis, chemotherapy types and doses, calcium levels throughout cancer treatment, and other co-morbidity. The mean calcium levels at first hospitalization before chemotherapy were compared with calcium levels at the end of or at the latest chemotherapy treatment. Statistical analysis was conducted using the Chi-square test for categorical data, logistic regression test for categorical variables, and Spearman correlation test, linear regression and the paired sample t tests for continuous data.
RESULTS: Of a total 1,023 of breast cancer and 814 lung cancer patients identified, 292 had hypercalcemia at first hospitalization or during cancer treatment (174 breast and 118 lung cancer patients). About a quarter of these patients had advanced stage cancers: 26.4% had mild hypercalcemia (10.5-11.9 mg/dl), 55.5% had moderate (12-12.9 mg/dl), and 18.2% severe hypercalcemia (13-13.9; 14-16 mg/dl). Chemotherapy lowered calcium levels significantly both in breast and lung cancer patients with hypercalcemia; in particular with chemotherapy type 5-flurouracil+epirubicin+cyclophosphamide (FEC) for breast cancer, and gemcitabine+cisplatin in lung cancer.
CONCLUSION: Chemotherapy decreases calcium levels in breast and lung cancer cases with hypercalcemia at cancer diagnosis, probably by reducing PTHrP levels.