Unleashing anti-tumour immunity: dietary restriction and exercise interventions adjunct to chemotherapy for cancer patients.

Conventional chemotherapies can stimulate the immune system by increasing tumour antigenicity (e.g., neoantigen exposure to immune cells) and altering adjuvanticity in the tumour (e.g., danger associated molecular patterns and cytokines). These molecules promote the recruitment, activation, and maturation of dendritic cells, which in turn, prime and activate cytotoxic T cells against tumour cells. However, several factors can decrease the immunostimulatory efficacy of chemotherapeutic agents. These include reduced tumour cell antigenicity and adjuvanticity and compromised immune function at a local and systemic level. Findings from preclinical studies show that dietary restriction and exercise promote systemic changes that may help to restore immune system function through several mechanisms, including an enhanced infiltration and function of antitumoral immune cells and a decrease in immunosuppressive cells, leading to a reduction in tumour volume. In addition, dietary restriction and exercise training in mice have been shown to enhance the efficacy of chemotherapy. In human studies there is also emerging evidence that dietary restriction and exercise can impact the immune system towards a more antitumoral profile. In this review, we discuss the immunostimulatory effects of dietary restriction (caloric restriction and fasting) and exercise training in preclinical cancer models, and potential synergies with chemotherapy. We then review clinical studies assessing the effects of these interventions on immune-related endpoints and tumour responses. Finally, we propose that combining dietary restriction with exercise could be a promising strategy to increase chemotherapy efficacy.

Enhancing circulatory myokines and extracellular vesicle uptake with targeted exercise in patients with prostate cancer (the MYEX trial): a single-group crossover study.

INTRODUCTION: Physical activity is associated with improved disease progression and cancer-specific survival in patients with prostate cancer (PCa). However, the mechanisms underlying these associations remain unclear, while the relative impact of exercise modes is unknown. This study aims to examine the differential impact of exercise mode on tumour-suppressive skeletal muscle-associated systemic molecules as well as their delivery mechanism. This study will compare the effects of the two main exercise modes, aerobic and resistance, on (1) circulatory myokine levels, (2) skeletal muscle-induced extracellular vesicle abundance and cargo contents, and (3) uptake of extracellular vesicles (EVs) in PCa cells in patients with localised or advanced PCa. METHODS: A single-group cross-over design will be used for patients at opposite ends of the disease spectrum. A total of 32 patients (localised PCa, n = 16; metastatic castrate-resistant PCa, n = 16) will be recruited while capitalising on two ongoing studies. Ethics amendment has been approved for two ongoing trials to share data, implement the acute exercise sessions, and collect additional blood samples from patients. The patients will undertake two exercise sessions (aerobic only and resistance only) in random order one week apart. Blood will be collected before, after, and 30 min post-exercise. Circulating/EV-contained myokine levels (irisin, IL-6, IL-15, FGF-21, and SPARC) and plasma skeletal muscle-induced EVs will be measured using ELISA and flow cytometry. PCa cell line growth with or without collected plasma will be examined using PCa cell lines (LNCaP, DU-145, and PC-3), while evaluating cellular uptake of EVs. Ethics amendments have been approved for two capitalising studies to share data, implement acute exercise sessions and collect additional samples from the patients. DISCUSSION: If findings show a differential impact of exercise mode on the establishment of an anti-cancer systemic environment, this will provide fundamental knowledge for developing targeted exercise prescriptions for patients with PCa across different disease stages. Findings will be reported in peer-reviewed publications and scientific conferences, in addition to working with national support groups to translate findings for the broader community. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The registration for the two capitalising studies are NCT02730338 and ACTRN12618000225213.

Loss of tumor-derived SMAD4 enhances primary tumor growth but not metastasis following BMP4 signalling.

BACKGROUND: Bone morphogenetic protein 4 (BMP4) is a potent inhibitor of breast cancer metastasis. However, a tumor-promoting effect of BMP4 is reported in other tumor types, especially when SMAD4 is inactive. METHODS: To assess the requirement for SMAD4 in BMP4-mediated suppression of metastasis, we knocked down SMAD4 in two different breast tumors and enforced SMAD4 expression in a third line with endogenous SMAD4 deletion. In addition, we assessed the requirement for SMAD4 in tumor cell-specific BMP signalling by expression of a constitutively active BMP receptor. Delineation of genes regulated by BMP4 in the presence or absence of SMAD4 was assessed by RNA sequencing and a BMP4-induced gene, MYO1F was assessed for its role in metastasis. Genes regulated by BMP4 and/or SMAD4 were assessed in a publicly available database of gene expression profiles of breast cancer patients. RESULTS: In the absence of SMAD4, BMP4 promotes primary tumor growth that is accompanied by increased expression of genes associated with DNA replication, cell cycle, and MYC signalling pathways. Despite increased primary tumor growth, BMP4 suppresses metastasis in the absence of tumor cell expression of SMAD4. Consistent with the anti-metastatic activity of BMP4, enforced signalling through the constitutively active receptor in SMAD4 positive tumors that lacked BMP4 expression still suppressed metastasis, but in the absence of SMAD4, the suppression of metastasis was largely prevented. Thus BMP4 is required for suppression of metastasis regardless of tumor SMAD4 status. The BMP4 upregulated gene, MYO1F, was shown to be a potent suppressor of breast cancer metastasis. Gene signature upregulated by BMP4 in the absence of SMAD4 was associated with poor prognosis in breast cancer patients, whereas gene signature upregulated by BMP4 in the presence of SMAD4 was associated with improved prognosis. CONCLUSIONS: BMP4 expression is required for suppression of metastasis regardless of the SMAD4 status of the tumor cells. Since BMP4 is a secreted protein, we conclude that it can act both in an autocrine manner in SMAD4-expressing tumor cells and in a paracrine manner on stromal cells to suppress metastasis. Deletion of SMAD4 from tumor cells does not prevent BMP4 from suppressing metastasis via a paracrine mechanism.

[177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 plus enzalutamide in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (ENZA-p): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Enzalutamide and lutetium-177 [177Lu]Lu-prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA)-617 both improve overall survival in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. Androgen and PSMA receptors have a close intracellular relationship, with data suggesting complementary benefit if targeted concurrently. In this study, we assessed the activity and safety of enzalutamide plus adaptive-dosed [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 versus enzalutamide alone as first-line treatment for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. METHODS: ENZA-p was an open-label, randomised, controlled phase 2 trial done at 15 hospitals in Australia. Participants were men aged 18 years or older with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer not previously treated with docetaxel or androgen receptor pathway inhibitors for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer, gallium-68 [68Ga]Ga-PSMA-PET-CT (PSMA-PET-CT) positive disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and at least two risk factors for early progression on enzalutamide. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) by a centralised, web-based system using minimisation with a random component to stratify for study site, disease burden, use of early docetaxel, and previous treatment with abiraterone acetate. Patients were either given oral enzalutamide 160 mg daily alone or with adaptive-dosed (two or four doses) intravenous 7·5 GBq [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 every 6-8 weeks dependent on an interim PSMA-PET-CT (week 12). The primary endpoint was prostate-specific antigen (PSA) progression-free survival, defined as the interval from the date of randomisation to the date of first evidence of PSA progression, commencement of non-protocol anticancer therapy, or death. The analysis was done in the intention-to-treat population, using stratified Cox proportional hazards regression. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04419402, and participant follow-up is ongoing. FINDINGS: 162 participants were randomly assigned between Aug 17, 2020, and July 26, 2022. 83 men were assigned to the enzalutamide plus [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 group, and 79 were assigned to the enzalutamide group. Median follow-up in this interim analysis was 20 months (IQR 18-21), with 32 (39%) of 83 patients in the enzalutamide plus [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 group and 16 (20%) of 79 patients in the enzalutamide group remaining on treatment at the data cutoff date. Median age was 71 years (IQR 64-76). Median PSA progression-free survival was 13·0 months (95% CI 11·0-17·0) in the enzalutamide plus [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 group and 7·8 months (95% CI 4·3-11·0) in the enzalutamide group (hazard ratio 0·43, 95% CI 0·29-0·63, p<0·0001). The most common adverse events (all grades) were fatigue (61 [75%] of 81 patients), nausea (38 [47%]), and dry mouth (32 [40%]) in the enzalutamide plus [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 group and fatigue (55 [70%] of 79), nausea (21 [27%]), and constipation (18 [23%]) in the enzalutamide group. Grade 3-5 adverse events occurred in 32 (40%) of 81 patients in the enzalutamide plus [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 group and 32 (41%) of 79 patients in the enzalutamide group. Grade 3 events that occurred only in the enzalutamide plus [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 group included anaemia (three [4%] of 81 participants) and decreased platelet count (one [1%] participant). No grade 4 or 5 events were attributed to treatment on central review in either group. INTERPRETATION: The addition of [177Lu]Lu-PSMA-617 to enzalutamide improved PSA progression-free survival providing evidence of enhanced anticancer activity in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer with risk factors for early progression on enzalutamide and warrants further evaluation of the combination more broadly in metastatic prostate cancer. FUNDING: Prostate Cancer Research Alliance (Movember and Australian Federal Government), St Vincent's Clinic Foundation, GenesisCare, Roy Morgan Research, and Endocyte (a Novartis company).

The SUB-urothelial DUrvalumab InjEction-1 (SUBDUE-1) trial: first-in-human trial in patients with bladder cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety of sub-urothelial injection of durvalumab and examine the impact on tissue and circulating immune cell populations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The patients were chemotherapy and immunotherapy naïve (bacille Calmette-Guérin allowed) with non-metastatic muscle-invasive bladder cancer or non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer planned for radical cystectomy (RC). The study was a Phase Ib 3 + 3 dose-escalation design with sub-urothelial injection of durvalumab at three pre-determined doses (25, 75, 150 mg) diluted in 25 mL normal saline, injected at 25 locations (25 × 1 mL injections), at least 2 weeks before RC. RESULTS: A total of 11 patients were recruited (10 male, one female). No significant changes were reported on American Urological Association Symptom Score or O'Leary Interstitial Cystitis Scale. In all, 14 adverse events (AEs) were reported (10 Grade 1, three Grade 2, one Grade 3), none considered immune-related. No Grade 4 or 5 AEs were recorded. All the patients underwent RC. Tissue immune populations changed following durvalumab injection (P = 0.012), with a statistically significant increase in M2-macrophage (CD163) when comparing the 25-150 mg dose (P = 0.021). Basal/mixed cancers showed a larger CD163 increase than luminal cancers (P = 0.033). CONCLUSION: Sub-urothelial injection of durvalumab is feasible and safe without immune-related AEs and shows local immunological effects.