RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Activation of the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway through loss of phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) occurs in approximately 50% of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Recent evidence suggests that combined inhibition of the androgen receptor (AR) and AKT may be beneficial in mCRPC with PTEN loss. PATIENTS AND METHODS: mCRPC patients who previously failed abiraterone and/or enzalutamide, received escalating doses of AZD5363 (capivasertib) starting at 320 mg twice daily (b.i.d.) given 4 days on and 3 days off, in combination with enzalutamide 160 mg daily. The co-primary endpoints were safety/tolerability and determining the maximum tolerated dose and recommended phase II dose; pharmacokinetics, antitumour activity, and exploratory biomarker analysis were also evaluated. RESULTS: Sixteen patients were enrolled, 15 received study treatment and 13 were assessable for dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). Patients were treated at 320, 400, and 480 mg b.i.d. dose levels of capivasertib. The recommended phase II dose identified for capivasertib was 400 mg b.i.d. with 1/6 patients experiencing a DLT (maculopapular rash) at this level. The most common grade ≥3 adverse events were hyperglycemia (26.7%) and rash (20%). Concomitant administration of enzalutamide significantly decreased plasma exposure of capivasertib, though this did not appear to impact pharmacodynamics. Three patients met the criteria for response (defined as prostate-specific antigen decline ≥50%, circulating tumour cell conversion, and/or radiological response). Responses were seen in patients with PTEN loss or activating mutations in AKT, low or absent AR-V7 expression, as well as those with an increase in phosphorylated extracellular signal-regulated kinase (pERK) in post-exposure samples. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of capivasertib and enzalutamide is tolerable and has antitumour activity, with all responding patients harbouring aberrations in the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT02525068.
Assuntos
Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efeitos adversos , Benzamidas , Humanos , Masculino , Nitrilas , Feniltioidantoína/análogos & derivados , Fosfatidilinositol 3-Quinases , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/tratamento farmacológico , Proteínas Proto-Oncogênicas c-akt , Pirimidinas , Pirróis , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Deletion of the chromatin remodeler chromodomain helicase DNA-binding protein 1 (CHD1) is a common genomic alteration found in human prostate cancers (PCas). CHD1 loss represents a distinct PCa subtype characterized by SPOP mutation and higher genomic instability. However, the role of CHD1 in PCa development in vivo and its clinical utility remain unclear. PATIENTS AND METHODS: To study the role of CHD1 in PCa development and its loss in clinical management, we generated a genetically engineered mouse model with prostate-specific deletion of murine Chd1 as well as isogenic CHD1 wild-type and homozygous deleted human benign and PCa lines. We also developed patient-derived organoid cultures and screened patients with metastatic PCa for CHD1 loss. RESULTS: We demonstrate that CHD1 loss sensitizes cells to DNA damage and causes a synthetic lethal response to DNA damaging therapy in vitro, in vivo, ex vivo, in patient-derived organoid cultures and in a patient with metastatic PCa. Mechanistically, CHD1 regulates 53BP1 stability and CHD1 loss leads to decreased error-free homologous recombination (HR) repair, which is compensated by increased error-prone non-homologous end joining (NHEJ) repair for DNA double-strand break (DSB) repair. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides the first in vivo and in patient evidence supporting the role of CHD1 in DSB repair and in response to DNA damaging therapy. We uncover mechanistic insights that CHD1 modulates the choice between HR and NHEJ DSB repair and suggest that CHD1 loss may contribute to the genomic instability seen in this subset of PCas.
Assuntos
Proteínas Cdh1/deficiência , Reagentes de Ligações Cruzadas/farmacologia , Quebras de DNA de Cadeia Dupla , Inibidores de Poli(ADP-Ribose) Polimerases/farmacologia , Neoplasias da Próstata/terapia , Animais , Proteínas Cdh1/genética , Linhagem Celular Tumoral , Reparo do DNA por Junção de Extremidades , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Regulação para Baixo , Deleção de Genes , Regulação Neoplásica da Expressão Gênica , Predisposição Genética para Doença , Humanos , Masculino , Camundongos Knockout , Fenótipo , Neoplasias da Próstata/genética , Neoplasias da Próstata/metabolismo , Neoplasias da Próstata/patologia , Estabilidade Proteica , Tolerância a Radiação , Reparo de DNA por Recombinação , Fatores de Tempo , Células Tumorais Cultivadas , Proteína 1 de Ligação à Proteína Supressora de Tumor p53/metabolismoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Abiraterone and enzalutamide are novel endocrine treatments that abrogate androgen receptor (AR) signalling in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Here, we developed a circulating tumour cells (CTCs)-based assay to evaluate AR expression in real-time in CRPC and investigated nuclear AR expression in CTCs in patients treated with enzalutamide and abiraterone. METHODS: CTCs were captured and characterised using the CellSearch system. An automated algorithm to identify CTCs and quantify AR expression was employed. The primary aim was to evaluate the association between CTC AR expression and prior treatment with abiraterone or enzalutamide. RESULTS: AR expression in CTCs was evaluated in 94 samples from 48 metastatic CRPC patients. We observed large intra-patient heterogeneity of AR expression in CTCs. Prior exposure to abiraterone or enzalutamide was not associated with a change in CTCs AR expression (median intensity and distribution of AR-positive classes). In support of this, we also confirmed maintained nuclear AR expression in tissue samples collected after progression on abiraterone. AR staining also identified additional AR-positive CD45-negative circulating cells that were CK-negative/weak and therefore missed using standard protocols. The number of these events correlated with traditional CTCs and was associated with worse outcome on univariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a non-invasive method to monitor AR nuclear expression in CTCs. Our studies confirm nuclear AR expression in CRPC patients progressing on novel endocrine treatments. Owing to the significant heterogeneity of AR expression in CTCs, studies in larger cohorts of patients are required to identify associations with outcome.
Assuntos
Androstenos/farmacologia , Células Neoplásicas Circulantes/efeitos dos fármacos , Células Neoplásicas Circulantes/metabolismo , Feniltioidantoína/análogos & derivados , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/sangue , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/tratamento farmacológico , Receptores Androgênicos/biossíntese , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Benzamidas , Linhagem Celular Tumoral , Progressão da Doença , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Metástase Neoplásica , Nitrilas , Feniltioidantoína/farmacologia , Neoplasias de Próstata Resistentes à Castração/patologiaRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), proposed as an indicator of cancer-related inflammation, has known prognostic value in prostate cancer. We examine its association with survival (OS) and response in patients treated with second-line chemotherapy. METHODS: We analysed patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated in the TROPIC trial, evaluating cabazitaxel versus mitoxantrone. Cox regression models were used to investigate the association of baseline NLR (BLNLR) with OS and the significance of a change in NLR count with treatment. Logistic regression models were used to determine the association of BLNLR counts with prostate specific antigen (PSA) and RECIST responses. The optimal NLR cut-off was established based on the concordance index of different values. RESULTS: Data from 755, 654 and 405 patients was available for OS, PSA and RECIST response analysis respectively. Median OS was 14.0 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 13.2-14.8]. Median NLR was 2.9 (IQR: 1.9-5.1). BLNLR was associated with survival (HR 1.5, 95% CI 1.1-2.1, P = 0.011) in multivariable analysis (MVA) independently of variables included in the Halabi nomogram, treatment arm and corticosteroid use. The optimal cut-off for a dichotomous NLR was selected at 3.0 based on its higher c-index related to survival. BLNLR ≥3.0 was associated with lower PSA response (40.1% versus 59.9%; P < 0.001) and RECIST response (7.7% versus 15.6%, P = 0.022) in MVA. Conversion from high (≥3) to low (<3) NLR was associated with improved survival (HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.51-0.85; P = 0.001) and higher PSA response rates (66.4% versus 33.6%; P = 0.000). Use of corticosteroids at baseline did not modify the association between NLR and survival. CONCLUSIONS: NLR is a valid prognostic biomarker in CRPC and is associated with survival, PSA and RECIST responses in patients treated with second-line chemotherapy. Changes in NLR counts with treatment may indicate benefit. NLR prognostic value is independent of prior use of corticosteroids. CLINICALTRIALSGOV: NCT00417079.