Search

Lung cancer is the leading cause of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Recently, we have shown that Notch1 inhibition resulted in substantial cell death of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cells in vitro. New compounds targeting Notch signal transduction have been developed and are now being tested in clinical trials. However, the tumorigenic role of individual Notch receptors in vivo remains largely unclear. Using a KrasG12D-driven endogenous NSCLC mouse model, we analyzed the effect of conditional Notch1 and Notch2 receptor deletion on NSCLC tumorigenesis. Notch1 deficiency led to a reduced early tumor formation and lower activity of MAPK compared with the controls. Unexpectedly, Notch2 deletion resulted in a dramatically increased carcinogenesis and increased MAPK activity. These mice died significantly earlier due to rapidly growing tumor burden. We found that Notch1 regulates Ras/MAPK pathway via HES1-induced repression of the DUSP1 promoter encoding a phosphatase specifically suppressing pERK1/2. Interestingly, Notch1 but not Notch2 ablation leads to decreased HES1 and DUSP1 expression. However, Notch2-depleted tumors showed an appreciable increase in β-catenin expression, a known activator of HES1 and important lung cancer oncogene. Characteristically for β-catenin upregulation, we found that the majority of Notch2-deficient tumors revealed an undifferentiated phenotype as determined by their morphology, E-Cadherin and TTF1 expression levels. In addition, these carcinomas showed aggressive growth patterns with bronchus invasion and obstruction. Together, we show that Notch2 mediates differentiation and has tumor suppressor functions during lung carcinogenesis, whereas Notch1 promotes tumor initiation and progression. These data are further supported by immunohistochemical analysis of human NSCLC samples showing loss or downregulation of Notch2 compared with normal lung tissue. In conclusion, this is the first study characterizing the in vivo functions of Notch1 and Notch2 in KrasG12D-driven NSCLC tumorigenesis. These data highlight the clinical importance of a thorough understanding of Notch signaling especially with regard to Notch-targeted therapies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

FOLFOX plus nivolumab represents a standard of care for first-line therapy of advanced gastroesophageal cancer (aGEC) with positive PD-L1 expression. The efficacy of second-line VEGFR-2 inhibition with ramucirumab (RAM) plus chemotherapy after progression to immunochemotherapy remains unclear. Medical records of patients with aGEC enrolled in the randomized phase II AIO-STO-0417 trial after treatment failure to first-line FOLFOX plus nivolumab and ipilimumab were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups based on second-line therapy: RAM plus chemotherapy (RAM group) or treatment without RAM (control group). Eighty three patients were included. In the overall population, progression-free survival (PFS) in the RAM group was superior to the control (4.5 vs 2.9 months). Responders (CR/PR) to first-line immunochemotherapy receiving RAM containing second-line therapy had prolonged OS from start of first-line therapy (28.9 vs 16.5 months), as well as second-line OS (9.6 vs 7.5 months), PFS (5.6 vs 2.9 months) and DCR (53% vs 29%) compared to the control. PD-L1 CPS ≥1 was 42% and 44% for the RAM and the control, respectively. Patients with CPS ≥1 in the RAM group showed better tumor control (ORR 25% vs 10%) and improved survival (total OS 11.5 vs 8.0 months; second-line OS 6.5 vs 3.9 months; PFS 4.5 vs 1.6 months) compared to the control. Prior exposure to first-line FOLFOX plus dual checkpoint inhibition followed by RAM plus chemotherapy shows favorable response and survival rates especially in patients with initial response and positive PD-L1 expression and has the potential to advance the treatment paradigm in aGEC., (© 2024 The Authors. International Journal of Cancer published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of UICC.)

Purpose: Apolipoprotein M (APOM) is a plasma apolipoprotein closely involved with lipid metabolism and inflammation. In vitro studies suggest that APOM may also have a tumor-suppressive role in breast cancer. In the present study, we aimed to evaluate the impact of plasma APOM levels on the prognosis of breast cancer patients., Methods: We measured APOM levels using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in 75 patients with ER-positive/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer. The endpoint was overall survival (OS) at 24 months., Results: During the 24-month follow-up period, 34.7% of the patients died. Baseline APOM levels were significantly reduced in patients who deceased during follow-up compared to survivors (42.7 ± 14.5 µg/mL versus 52.2 ± 13.8 µg/mL; P = 0.003). Cox regression analysis showed a hazard ratio of 0.30 [95% confidence interval 0.15-0.61]; P < 0.001 per doubling of APOM levels. Correction for age, C-reactive protein, menopausal state, histology of the primary tumor, metastatic site, number of metastases, endocrine resistance, scheduled therapy line, and kind of scheduled therapy indicated that circulating APOM predicted OS independently of these parameters (HR per doubling  = 0.23 [0.09-0.56; P = 0.001)., Conclusions: Our study suggests that circulating APOM is significantly linked with reduced mortality in metastatic breast cancer patients., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature.)

Purpose: RAS mutations are predictors of an adverse outcome in EGFR-targeted therapies and have been proposed as prognostic biomarkers of survival in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The analysis of circulating tumor DNA from plasma samples, known as liquid biopsies, has indicated that the RAS mutation status may change over time, potentially affecting patients' prognosis. To further evaluate the clinical validity of RAS mutation retesting using liquid biopsies, we prospectively investigated the impact of the circulating quantitative RAS mutation status on the course of mCRC., Methods: The present study included 81 consecutively recruited patients with mCRC. We used targeted next-generation sequencing of circulating cell-free DNA to determine and quantify plasma RAS mutation status., Results: Patients with a RAS mutation detected by liquid biopsy (37%; n = 30) were at increased risk of death during the follow-up period compared to RAS wild-type patients. Patients with evidence of a RAS mutation in the primary tumor but a putative RAS mutation loss in plasma (28%; n = 11) showed a prolonged survival compared to patients with a preserved RAS mutation status. Also, circulating RAS mutation concentrations significantly affected the outcome: The mortality risk of patients with a high RAS mutation concentration increased fivefold compared to subjects with a putative RAS mutation loss or low RAS mutation concentration., Conclusion: Our results emphasize the clinical value of circulating RAS mutations in managing mCRC., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Real-world data on the first-line treatment of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are still limited. The NEPTUN study evaluated effectiveness and safety of first-line nab-paclitaxel (Abraxane) plus carboplatin (nab-P/C) in patients with advanced NSCLC in routine clinical practice in Germany. Patients included in our study were aged ≥18 years, diagnosed with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC and with decision for first-line nab-P/C in routine clinical practice. Primary objective was 6-month progression-free survival rate (PFS6), secondary objectives included overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR) and safety. From 2016 to 2019, 408 patients from 75 sites were enrolled. PFS6 was 39.5% (95% CI: 34.2-44.8), median PFS was 5.1 months (95% CI: 4.6-5.6), ORR was 42.9% (95% CI: 37.7-48.2). Median OS was 10.5 months (95% CI: 9.2-11.6). In subgroup analyses, median OS for squamous vs non-squamous histology was 11.5 months (95% CI: 9.2-13.8) vs 9.8 months (95% CI: 8.1-11.3) and for patients aged ≥70 vs <70 years median OS was 12.4 months (95% CI: 9.8-15.1) vs 9.6 months (95% CI: 7.7-11.1). Adverse events (AEs) related to nab-paclitaxel were reported in 247 (66.4%) patients, while carboplatin-related AEs were documented in 224 (60.2%) patients. Most frequently related AEs were leukopenia (22.3%) for nab-paclitaxel and anemia (20.2%) for carboplatin. Nab-P/C-related deaths were reported in 2 (0.5%) patients (sepsis and neutropenic sepsis). No new or unexpected safety signals emerged. These results support the effectiveness and safety of first-line nab-P/C in patients with advanced NSCLC reported in the pivotal trial and highlight the clinical value of this regimen in the real-world setting., (© 2023 The Authors. International Journal of Cancer published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of UICC.)

Background: Paclitaxel in combination with ramucirumab is the standard of care second-line therapy in gastro-esophageal adenocarcinoma (GEA). As the number of taxane pretreated patients in the perioperative or first-line setting is increasing, it is unknown whether these patients benefit from re-applying a taxane in using the combination of paclitaxel and ramucirumab. Furthermore, the rates of neurotoxicity with first-line FOLFOX or FLOT range from 30%-70%, making second-line taxane-containing therapy less suitable to a meaningful portion of patients. This patient group is likely to benefit from a taxane-free second-line chemotherapy regimen, such as FOLFIRI and ramucirumab (FOLFIRI-Ram). Therefore, the RAMIRIS phase III trial evaluates the effects of the regimen of FOLFIRI-Ram in the second-line treatment after a taxane-based chemotherapy in patients with advanced GEA., Methods: The RAMIRIS trial is a randomized, open-label, multicenter phase II/III study comparing treatment of FOLFIRI-Ram (arm A) with paclitaxel and ramucirumab (arm B). The Phase II is already closed with 111 enrolled patients. In the phase III, 318 taxane-pretreated patients with advanced GEA will be recruited and randomized 1:1 to FOLFIRI (5-FU 2400 mg/m 2 over 46 h i.v., irinotecan 180 mg/m 2 i.v.; 5-FU 400 mg/m 2 bolus; leucovorin 400 mg/m 2 i.v.; on day 1 and 15, q28) with ramucirumab 8 mg/kg every two weeks (Arm A) or paclitaxel 80 mg/m 2 (days 1, 8, 15, q28) with ramucirumab 8 mg/kg every two weeks (Arm B). The primary endpoints are overall survival (OS) and objective overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints are progression-free survival (PFS), disease control rate and safety and quality of life as assessed by EORTC-QLQ-C30 questionnaire., Discussion: The already completed RAMIRIS phase II demonstrated feasibility and efficacy of FOLFIRI-Ram. Especially docetaxel-pretreated patients seemed to markedly benefit from FOLFIRI-Ram, with favorable response- and PFS rates and lower toxicity. This offers a rationale for the phase III trial. If the RAMIRIS III trial transfers and confirms the results, they will affect the current treatment guidelines, recommending the combination therapy of FOLFIRI-Ram for taxane-pretreated patients with advanced GEA., Trial Registration: NCT03081143 Date of registration: 13.11.2015., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Introduction: Endocrine treatment combined with CDK4/6 inhibitors is the preferred treatment strategy in patients presenting with ER-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer, but the clinical course remains highly variable among individual patients. There is an unmet need for prognostic or predictive biomarkers in this important group of patients. Recently, we have identified circulating glypican-4 (GPC4) as a new biomarker of inferior outcomes in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. The impact of plasma GPC4 levels on the survival of breast cancer patients is unknown and has been addressed in the present study., Methods: Our study included 47 patients with ER-positive/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer prior to treatment with CDK4/6 inhibitors combined with endocrine therapy. The endpoint was overall survival (OS) at 24 months. GPC4 levels were measured in plasma using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay., Results: Increased circulating GPC4 levels were significantly linked to advanced age, postmenopausal state, visceral metastases, and invasive lobular carcinoma. During the 2-year observational follow-up period, 25.5% of patients died. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROC-AUC) analysis revealed an AUC of 0.713 [0.555-0.871]; p = 0.029 for OS; and an optimal cutoff value of GPC4 for predicting OS of 4.77 ng/mL. No patient showing GPC4 values below this cutoff died during the observational period. Cox regression analysis showed a hazard ratio of 2.14 [95% confidence interval: 1.24-3.67]; p = 0.006 for one standard deviation change of plasma GPC4., Conclusions: Our study suggests circulating GPC4 as a significant predictor of poor survival in metastatic breast cancer patients., (© 2023 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Cell surface syndecans and glypicans play important roles in the development and prognosis of colorectal cancer (CRC). Their soluble forms from proteoglycan shedding can be detected in blood and have been proposed as new prognostic biomarkers in several cancer entities. However, studies on circulating syndecan-1 (SDC1) and glypican-4 (GPC4) in CRC are limited. We, therefore, evaluated the impact of plasma SDC1 and GPC4 on the prognosis of metastatic (m)CRC patients. The present study included 93 patients with mCRC. The endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) at 12 months. SDC1 and GPC4 levels were measured in plasma using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. Plasma levels of SDC1 and GPC4 were significantly correlated. Significant correlations of these two markers were also found with carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA). Kaplan-Meier curve analyses indicated that PFS and OS probabilities significantly decreased with increasing levels of SDC1 and GPC4, respectively. Multivariable Cox regression analyses showed that both markers were significantly associated with PFS and OS independently from clinicopathological characteristics including CEA. Respective adjusted hazard ratios (HR) together with corresponding 95% confidence intervals for one standard deviation change of SDC1 were 1.32 [1.02-1.84] for PFS and 1.48 [1.01-2.15] for OS. Adjusted HRs [95% confidence intervals] of GPC4 were 1.42 [1.07-1.89] for PFS and 2.40 [1.51-3.81] for OS. Results from area under the receiver operating characteristic curve analyses suggest that GPC4 and SDC1 add additional prognostic values to CEA for OS. In conclusion, we showed significant associations of circulating SDC1 and GPC4 with poor survival of mCRC patients., Competing Interests: The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2022 Muendlein, Severgnini, Decker, Heinzle, Leiherer, Geiger, Drexel, Winder, Reimann, Mayer, Nonnenbroich and Dechow.)

Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with or without chemotherapy represent first-line standard of care for patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without targetable driver mutations. The most appropriate second-line therapy after failing immunochemotherapy remains an open question. Nintedanib, an oral triple angiokinase inhibitor that targets the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, fibroblast growth factor receptor, and, platelet-derived growth factor receptor, in combination with docetaxel, is approved for treatment of advanced NSCLC (adenocarcinoma histology) following progression on first-line chemotherapy., Methods: VARGADO (NCT02392455) is an ongoing, prospective, non-interventional study investigating the efficacy and safety of nintedanib plus docetaxel following first-line chemotherapy with or without ICIs in patients with locally advanced, metastatic, or locally recurrent NSCLC of adenocarcinoma histology. This analysis focuses on Cohort C, which enrolled patients who had received prior first line chemotherapy with ICIs. Patients received second-line docetaxel (75 mg/m 2 ) by intravenous infusion on Day 1, plus oral nintedanib (200 mg twice daily) on Days 2-21 of each 21-day cycle during routine clinical care. The primary endpoint is overall survival (OS) rate 1 year after the start of treatment with nintedanib plus docetaxel. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival (PFS), OS, and disease control rate (DCR). Safety was also assessed., Results: Among 137 patients treated, the median age was 63 years (range, 37-84); 57 patients (41.6%) were female, most patients had Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 (28.5%) or 1 (43.1%); 118 (86.1%) had stage IV NSCLC and 27 (19.7%) had brain metastases. Most (n=120, 87.6%) patients had received pembrolizumab/pemetrexed/platinum-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment. In 80 patients with available response data, the DCR was 72.5% (complete response: 1.3%; partial response: 36.3%; stable disease: 35.0%). Median progression-free survival was 4.8 months (95% confidence interval: 3.7-6.6). OS data were immature. Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious TEAEs, and TEAEs leading to treatment discontinuation were reported in 62 (45.3%), 50 (36.5%), and 40 patients (29.2%), respectively., Conclusions: This analysis indicates that nintedanib plus docetaxel represents an effective second-line treatment option in patients with advanced adenocarcinoma NSCLC following progression on first-line immunochemotherapy. The safety profile was manageable with no unexpected signals., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://tlcr.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/tlcr-21-1018/coif). CG reports consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers’ bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Boehringer Ingelheim; payment for expert testimony from Boehringer Ingelheim; support for attending meetings and/or travel from Boehringer Ingelheim; participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board for Boehringer Ingelheim; leadership or fiduciary role in other board, society, committee or advocacy group, paid or unpaid for DKG DGP. TW reports grants or contracts from Boehringer Ingelheim in support of an investigator-initiated trial (NCT04413201); consulting fees from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Serono, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers’ bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche/Genentech; payment for expert testimony from Takeda, Roche; support for attending meetings and/or travel from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Celgene, Pfizer, Roche/Genentech; participation on a data safety monitoring or advisory board from Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche, AstraZeneca; research funding from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Roche/Genentech. S Henschke reports provision of study data as part of the VARGADO study and review of the manuscript (no payment); grants or contracts from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche; consulting fees from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers’ bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche; support for attending meetings and/or travel from Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche; participating on an advisory board for Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, Chugai, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Roche; equipment, materials, drugs, medical writing, gifts or other services from Boehringer Ingelheim in the context of participation in the VARGADO study. WS reports consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim (served in an advisory board and fees paid to the author); payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Boehringer Ingelheim (paid to the author). ID reports payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers’ bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH, Bristol-Myers Squibb GmbH & Co KgaA, Takeda Pharma GmbH, Novartis Pharma GmbH, Pfizer Pharma GmbH, AstraZeneca Pharma GmbH, Merck Sharp & Dohme GmbH; payment for expert testimony, support for attending meetings and/or travel, and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board from Siehe Punkt 5. S Hammerschmidt reports consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers’ bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Boehringer Ingelheim. HMH reports research funding from Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca; honoraria from Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merck, Eisai, Janssen; consulting fees from Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Merck, Eisai, Janssen; travel support from AstraZeneca, Janssen. CS reports recruitment of patients and manuscript review and approval as support for the present manuscript; honoraria or presentations from AstraZeneca and Bristol-Myers Squibb to institution and to self. S Krüger reports support for the present manuscript from Boehringer Ingelheim; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers’ bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Boehringer Ingelheim. JA reports employment with Boehringer Ingelheim. R Kaiser reports employment with Boehringer Ingelheim and patent (EP 2994125). TD has no conflicts of interest to declare., (2022 Translational Lung Cancer Research. All rights reserved.)

Background: Prognosis of patients with multiple myeloma (MM) who have relapsed on or become refractory to immunomodulators and bortezomib is poor, and treatment options are limited. While pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone (POM/DEX) has demonstrated efficacy in clinical trials, real-world evidence is scarce., Patients and Methods: POSEIDON was a prospective non-interventional study designed to evaluate effectiveness, safety and quality of life (QoL) of POM/DEX in patients with relapsed or refractory MM (R/RMM) pretreated with at least two prior therapy lines including both lenalidomide and bortezomib in real world in Germany. Patients received POM/DEX according to physicians' choice. Data were analyzed descriptively., Results: Between 2014 and 2017, 151 patients were enrolled, 144 patients with a median of three prior therapy lines qualified for effectiveness analysis. Median age was 73.2 years. Median progression-free and overall survival were 6.3 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 5.2, 8.6] and 12.9 months [95% CI 10.6, 15.1]. Most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events were leukopenia (8.2%), pneumonia (7.5%) and anemia (5.5%). QoL was maintained after start of POM/DEX., Conclusion: The results of POSEIDON support the effectiveness and safety of POM/DEX in R/RMM patients pretreated with lenalidomide and bortezomib and highlight the clinical value of the POM/DEX regimen in the real-world setting. Registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02075996)., (© 2021 The Authors. European Journal of Haematology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: Somatic evolution of the cancer genome resulting in genetically different subclones is thought to be involved in the development of treatment resistance but might also offer new therapeutic opportunities in metastatic breast cancer. No data are available if clonal evolution differs in patients treated with chemotherapy (chemo) or CDK4/6 inhibitors given with endocrine treatment (CE treatment)., Methods: We performed a prospective analysis of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) by targeted next-generation sequencing in 46 patients before the beginning of a systemic first-line (n = 37) or second-line (n = 9) treatment. Ct DNA was analyzed again upon disease progression., Results: New mutations in ctDNA of patients with progressive disease were detected in 1/11 patients who started chemo, in 4/9 patients treated with chemo followed by CE maintenance treatment, and in 9/26 patients receiving CE therapy. The number of acquired new mutations did not differ significantly between the three therapy cohorts (all p values >0.05). However, in patients classified as secondary resistant (n = 37), occurrence of new mutations significantly differed between patients who started chemo (0/9) compared to patients treated with chemo followed by CE (4/11; p = 0.041) and patients receiving CE therapy (8/19; p = 0.024), respectively., Conclusion: Clonal evolution might differ significantly between metastatic breast cancer patients with hormone receptor positive and HER-2 negative disease treated with chemo or CDK4/6 inhibitors. These results should be confirmed in larger patient cohorts., (© 2022 S. Karger AG, Basel.)