Citations

Abstract Pyrazoloacridine (PZA) is an experimental antitumor agent presently under investigation for treatment of solid tumors on the basis of its unique mechanism of action and selectivity for human solid tumor xenograft in mice. Using capillary electrophoresis coupled with electrospray ionization mass spectrometry, we have identified three oxidative PZA metabolites, 9-desmethyl-PZA, N-demethyl-PZA, and PZA N-oxide. The cytochrome P450 (CYP) isoforms involved in PZA metabolism were characterized by studies with CYP chemical inhibitors, correlation of marker activities for selected CYPs with formation of the metabolites using a human liver panel, and PZA metabolism by cDNA-expressed CYPs. 9-Desmethyl-PZA formation was catalyzed by CYP1A2, whereas N-demethyl-PZA formation was catalyzed by CYP3A4. PZA N-oxide formation was catalyzed by flavin monooxygenase (FMO) rather than CYP, as determined by studies with chemical inhibitors of FMO and metabolism by cDNA-expressed human flavin monooxygenase. After administration of [10b-14C]PZA to mice, six urinary metabolites were detected by high-performance liquid chromatography UV and radiochromatograms including 9-desmethyl-PZA, N-demethyl-PZA, and PZA N-oxide. Trace concentrations of 9-desmethyl-PZA and PZA N-oxide were detected in mouse plasma. PZA N-oxide and N-demethyl-PZA were detected in urine from patients after PZA administration. PZA, 9-desmethyl-PZA, and PZA N-oxide inhibited growth of A375 human melanoma cells. IC50 values were 0.17, 0.11, and 7.0 μm, respectively, for the three molecules.

Abstract Purpose: Tumor markers ideally allow monitoring and prediction of disease progression. In Ewing’s sarcoma, a devastating childhood cancer, only a few reliable prognostic markers have been identified. To this end, we analyzed the expression of four tumor-promoting proteins, cyclin D1, HER2/Neu, Mdm2, and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), in Ewing’s sarcoma. Experimental Design and Results: Thirty-one tissue samples from patients with Ewing’s sarcoma were stained with antibodies against cyclin D1, HER2/Neu, Mdm2, or VEGF. Whereas no significant expression of HER2/Neu and Mdm2 was detected, positive cyclin D1 and VEGF staining was observed in 42% and 55% of all tumors, respectively. Importantly, VEGF expression was found to be an independent negative predictor of survival in Ewing’s sarcoma patients, whereas cyclin D1 expression did not correlate with survival in these patients. Consistently, the Ewing’s sarcoma-specific EWS-ETS oncoproteins were capable of activating both the cyclin D1 and VEGF promoters in transient transfections of tissue culture cells. Furthermore, this activation was enhanced by coexpression of the Sp1 transcription factor. Using a mammalian two-hybrid system, some evidence was obtained that this may involve a physical interaction between EWS-ETS and Sp1 proteins. Conclusions: Our data reveal that VEGF may serve as a prognostic marker in Ewing’s sarcoma patients and provide a molecular mechanism by which VEGF and cyclin D1 expression is up-regulated in approximately half of all Ewing’s sarcomas.

Abstract The introduction of the nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NS-AI) anastrozole as an alternative to tamoxifen for adjuvant therapy of women with resected hormone receptor-positive breast cancer has added a management category into which patients presenting with metastatic disease can be placed. There are now essentially three such categories: (a) tamoxifen sensitive (no prior AI); (b) tamoxifen resistant (no prior AI); and (c) NS-AI resistant (no prior tamoxifen). Well-conducted Phase III trials provide evidence for choosing first-line therapy for advanced disease in categories a and b. In tamoxifen-sensitive patients, one can choose either NS-AI, anastrozole, or letrozole. In tamoxifen-resistant patients, one can choose either of the NS-AIs, the steroidal AI exemestane, or the estrogen receptor down-regulator fulvestrant. The situation is quite different for patients in category c. There are no Phase III trials of agents in patients who have experienced disease progression on a NS-AI. Phase II data are available for exemestane and high-dose estrogens, and retrospective data are available for tamoxifen and fulvestrant. Additional clinical trials are needed to determine an optimal sequencing strategy.

Abstract Purpose: To assess the maximum tolerated dose, toxicities, pharmacokinetics, and antileukemic activity of topotecan and carboplatin in adults with recurrent or refractory acute leukemias. Experimental Design: Patients received topotecan and carboplatin by 5-day continuous infusion at nine dose levels. Patients achieving a complete remission received up to two additional courses for consolidation. Plasma topotecan and ultrafilterable platinum were assayed on days 1 to 5. In addition, pretreatment levels of various polypeptides in leukemic cells were examined by immunoblotting to assess possible correlations with response. Results: Fifty-one patients received a total of 69 courses of therapy. Dose-limiting toxicity consisted of grade 4/5 typhlitis and grade 3/4 mucositis after one course of therapy or grade 4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia lasting >50 days when a second course was administered on day 21. Among 45 evaluable patients, there were 7 complete remissions, 2 partial remissions, 1 incomplete complete remission, and 1 reversion to chronic-phase chronic myelogenous leukemia. Topotecan steady-state plasma concentrations increased with dose. No accumulation of topotecan or ultrafilterable platinum occurred between days 1 and 5 of therapy. Leukemic cell levels of topoisomerase I, checkpoint kinase 1, checkpoint kinase 2, and Mcl-1 correlated with proliferating cell nuclear antigen but not with response. In contrast, low Bcl-2 expression correlated with response (P = 0.014, Mann-Whitney U test). Conclusions: The maximum tolerated dose was 1.6 mg/m2/d topotecan plus 150 mg/m2/d carboplatin. The complete remission rate in a heavily pretreated population was 16% (33% at the highest three dose levels). Responses seem to correlate with low pretreatment blast cell Bcl-2 expression.

Abstract Purpose: Most colorectal cancers that have high levels of microsatellite instability (MSI-H) show loss of immunohistochemical expression of proteins that participate in the DNA mismatch repair process, most often involving MLH1 and MSH2. Less commonly, a third DNA mismatch repair protein, MSH6, may also be lost as the primary event. Rarely, tumors with MSI-H show normal expression of these three proteins. The genetic deficiency leading to the MSI-H phenotype in such cases is unknown. PMS2 is another member of the DNA mismatch repair complex. Its expression is generally lost in tumors with MLH1 loss of expression. Rarely, there is selective loss of PMS2 expression. We sought to describe the frequency and clinical correlates of selective loss of expression of PMS2 with the MSI-H tumor phenotype. Experimental Design: Two thousand seven hundred nineteen colorectal cancers from both clinic- and research-based ascertainment were studied. Tumor MSI testing and immunohistochemistry for MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, and PMS2 were conducted. Medical records were abstracted for age at diagnosis, gender, colorectal cancer site, and family history. Results: Five hundred thirty-five of the 2,719 tumors were MSI-H. Of these, 93% showed loss of expression of MLH1, MSH2, and/or MSH6. Thirty-eight showed normal expression for these proteins. PMS2 immunohistochemical staining was successful in 32 of 38 of these tumors. Of the 32, 23 showed selective loss of expression of PMS2. This was associated with young age of diagnosis and right-sided location but not with a striking family history of cancer. Conclusions: Overall, 97% of the MSI-H tumors showed loss of expression for one or more of these four mismatch repair proteins. Selective loss of expression of PMS2 was present in 72% of cases in which colorectal cancers had an MSI-H phenotype but no alteration of expression of MLH1, MSH2, and MSH6. The underlying mechanism involved cannot be determined from this study but could involve point mutations in other DNA mismatch repair genes with retention of immunohistochemical expression, somatic inactivation of PMS2, or germ line mutation of PMS2.

Abstract Purpose: Epithelial ovarian cancers are thought to arise from flattened epithelial cells that cover the ovarian surface or that line inclusion cysts. During malignant transformation, different histotypes arise that resemble epithelial cells from normal fallopian tube, endometrium, and intestine. This study compares gene expression in serous, endometrioid, clear cell, and mucinous ovarian cancers with that in the normal tissues that they resemble. Experimental Design: Expression of 63,000 probe sets was measured in 50 ovarian cancers, in 5 pools of normal ovarian epithelial brushings, and in mucosal scrapings from 4 normal fallopian tube, 5 endometrium, and 4 colon specimens. Using rank-sum analysis, genes whose expressions best differentiated the ovarian cancer histotypes and normal ovarian epithelium were used to determine whether a correlation based on gene expression existed between ovarian cancer histotypes and the normal tissues they resemble. Results: When compared with normal ovarian epithelial brushings, alterations in serous tumors correlated with those in normal fallopian tube (P = 0.0042) but not in other normal tissues. Similarly, mucinous cancers correlated with those in normal colonic mucosa (P = 0.0003), and both endometrioid and clear cell histotypes correlated with changes in normal endometrium (P = 0.0172 and 0.0002, respectively). Mucinous cancers displayed the greatest number of alterations in gene expression when compared with normal ovarian epithelial cells. Conclusion: Studies at a molecular level show distinct expression profiles of different histologies of ovarian cancer and support the long-held belief that histotypes of ovarian cancers come to resemble normal fallopian tube, endometrial, and colonic epithelium. Several potential molecular markers for mucinous ovarian cancers have been identified.

Abstract A group of investigators met at a Specialized Programs of Research Excellence Workshop to discuss key issues in the translation of biomarker discovery to the development of useful laboratory tests for cancer care. Development and approval of several new markers and technologies have provided informative examples that include more specific markers for prostate cancer, more sensitive tests for ovarian cancer, more objective analysis of tissue architecture and an earlier indication of response to treatment in breast cancer. Although there is no clear paradigm for biomarker development, several principles are clear. Marker development should be driven by clinical needs, including early cancer detection, accurate pretreatment staging, and prediction of response to treatment, as well as monitoring disease progression and response to therapy. Development of a national repository that uses carefully preserved, well-annotated tissue specimens will facilitate new marker development. Reference standards will be an essential component of this process. Both hospital-based and commercial laboratories can play a role in developing biomarkers from discovery to test validation. Partnering of academe and industry should occur throughout the process of biomarker development. The National Cancer Institute is in a unique position to bring together academe, industry, and the Food and Drug Administration to (a) define clinical needs for biomarkers by tumor type, (b) establish analytic and clinical paradigms for biomarker development, (c) discuss ways in which markers from different companies might be evaluated in combination, (d) establish computational methods to combine data from multiple biomarkers, (e) share information regarding promising markers developed in National Cancer Institute–supported programs, and (f) exchange data regarding new platforms and techniques that can accelerate marker development.

AbstractPurpose: The B7 family molecules have been shown to regulate immune responses in both positive and negative fashions. Their roles in the progression of human cancers, however, are not well established. The aim of this study was to examine whether leukemic cells of acute myeloid leukemia express functional B7 family molecules and, if so, whether such expression has any clinical significance.Experimental Design: The expression of four B7 family molecules, B7.1, B7.2, B7-H1, and B7-H2, on leukemic cells from acute myeloid leukemia patients was analyzed by flow cytometry. The function of the expressed molecules was examined by the allogeneic mixed lymphocyte-leukemic cell reaction, and their relationship to the clinical data and survival was analyzed.Results: Although B7.1 and B7-H1 expressions were rare, the cells from a substantial number of acute myeloid leukemia cases expressed B7.2 and B7-H2 molecules [mean percentages of B7.2- and B7-H2-positive cells were 28.9% (n = 58) and 15.3% (n = 59), respectively]. Patients in whom >25% of leukemic cells expressed B7-H2 had significantly shorter survival, and this B7-H2 positivity had the strongest prognostic value when B7-H2 and other prognostic factors were analyzed together by multivariate analysis (P = 0.0108). Furthermore, B7.2 expression was associated with hyperleukocytosis (P = 0.026). Consistent with this finding, acute myeloid leukemia cells expressing B7.2 and B7-H2 induced allogeneic CD4+ T cells to proliferate and secrete interleukin-4 and interleukin-10 in vitro, effects that were partially blocked by antibodies against B7.2 and B7-H2.Conclusions: Our results indicate the expression of functional B7.2 and B7-H2 molecules, and these molecules may facilitate progression of acute myeloid leukemia.

Abstract Purpose: Flavopiridol, a cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor, transcription inhibitor, and DNA-interacting agent, was combined with cisplatin or carboplatin to establish toxicities, evaluate pharmacokinetics, and examine its effects on patient cancers and levels of selected polypeptides in patient peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC). Experimental Design: Therapy was given every 3 weeks. Stage I: cisplatin was fixed at 30 mg/m2 with escalating flavopiridol. Stage II: flavopiridol was fixed at the stage I maximum tolerated dose (MTD) with escalation of cisplatin. Stage III: flavopiridol was fixed at the stage I MTD with escalation of carboplatin. Results: Thirty-nine patients were treated with 136 cycles of chemotherapy. Neutropenia was seen in only 11% of patients. Grade 3 flavopiridol/CDDP toxicities were nausea (30%), vomiting (19%), diarrhea (15%), dehydration (15%), and neutropenia (10%). Flavopiridol combined with carboplatin resulted in unexpectedly high toxicities and one treatment-related death. Stable disease (>3 months) was seen in 34% of treated patients, but there were no objective responses. The stage II MTD was 60 mg/m2 cisplatin and 100 mg/m2/24 hours flavopiridol. As given, CDDP did not alter flavopiridol pharmacokinetics. Flavopiridol induced increased p53 and pSTAT3 levels in patient PBMCs but had no effects on cyclin D1, phosphoRNA polymerase II, or Mcl-1. Conclusions: Flavopiridol and cisplatin can be safely combined in the treatment of cancer patients. Unexpected toxicity in flavopiridol/carboplatin-treated patients attenuates enthusiasm for this alternative combination. Analysis of polypeptide levels in patient PBMCs suggests that flavopiridol may be affecting some, but not all, of its known in vitro molecular targets in vivo.