Search

Imatinib has impressive activity against chronic myeloid leukaemia (CML), but does not appear to completely eradicate the disease. Although responses to interferon-alpha (IFN) are slower and less dramatic than those to imatinib, they can be durable even after discontinuation of the drug. Unlike imatinib, the specific mechanisms responsible for IFN's clinical activity in CML are unknown. We found that IFN induced a G1 cell cycle arrest, as well as terminal differentiation, of the CML cell line KT-1 and CML CD34+ cells from clinical specimens. Myeloid growth factors augmented the antileukaemic activity of IFN, and neutralising antibodies directed against myeloid growth factors inhibited IFN's antileukaemic activity. We next directly compared the effects of imatinib and IFN against differentiated and primitive CML progenitors from newly-diagnosed patients. Although less active against CML granulocyte-macrophage colony forming units than imatinib, IFN was significantly more toxic to primitive CML progenitors responsible for the maintenance of long-term cultures. Imatinib and IFN appear to have divergent effects on CML progenitors at different stages of maturation, with imatinib more active against differentiated CML progenitors and IFN more active against primitive CML progenitors. The different target cells for these agents may explain the disparities in the kinetics and durability of their clinical responses. At least part of the clinical effect of IFN in CML appears to result from its ability to differentiate primitive CML progenitors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Over the past two decades, major advances in our understanding of cancer have translated into only modest increments in survival for the majority of cancer patients. Recent data suggesting cancers arise from rare self-renewing stem cells that are biologically distinct from their more numerous differentiated progeny may explain this paradox. Current anticancer therapies have been developed to decrease the bulk of the tumour mass (i.e. the differentiated cancer cells). Although treatments directed against the bulk of the cancer may produce dramatic responses, they are unlikely to result in long-term remissions if the rare cancer stem cells are also not targeted. Conversely, treatments that selectively attack cancer stem cells will not immediately eliminate the differentiated cancer cells, and might therefore be prematurely abandoned if clinical activity is judged solely by traditional response criteria that reflect changes in the bulk of the tumour. Re-examining both our pre-clinical and clinical drug development paradigms to include the cancer stem cell concept has the potential to revolutionize the treatment of many cancers. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]