Identification of tumor-agnostic biomarkers for predicting prostate cancer progression and biochemical recurrence.

The diverse clinical outcomes of prostate cancer have led to the development of gene signature assays predicting disease progression. Improved prostate cancer progression biomarkers are needed as current RNA biomarker tests have varying success for intermediate prostate cancer. Interest grows in universal gene signatures for invasive carcinoma progression. Early breast and prostate cancers share characteristics, including hormone dependence and BRCA1/2 mutations. Given the similarities in the pathobiology of breast and prostate cancer, we utilized the NanoString BC360 panel, comprising the validated PAM50 classifier and pathway-specific signatures associated with general tumor progression as well as breast cancer-specific classifiers. This retrospective cohort of primary prostate cancers (n=53) was stratified according to biochemical recurrence (BCR) status and the CAPRA-S to identify genes related to high-risk disease. Two public cohort (TCGA-PRAD and GSE54460) were used to validate the results. Expression profiling of our cohort uncovered associations between PIP and INHBA with BCR and high CAPRA-S score, as well as associations between VCAN, SFRP2, and THBS4 and BCR. Despite low levels of the ESR1 gene compared to AR, we found strong expression of the ER signaling signature, suggesting that BCR may be driven by ER-mediated pathways. Kaplan-Meier and univariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis indicated the expression of ESR1, PGR, VCAN, and SFRP2 could predict the occurrence of relapse events. This is in keeping with the pathways represented by these genes which contribute to angiogenesis and the epithelial-mesenchymal transition. It is likely that VCAN works by activating the stroma and remodeling the tumor microenvironment. Additionally, SFRP2 overexpression has been associated with increased tumor size and reduced survival rates in breast cancer and among prostate cancer patients who experienced BCR. ESR1 influences disease progression by activating stroma, stimulating stem/progenitor prostate cancer, and inducing TGF-ß. Estrogen signaling may therefore serve as a surrogate to AR signaling during progression and in hormone-refractory disease, particularly in prostate cancer patients with stromal-rich tumors. Collectively, the use of agnostic biomarkers developed for breast cancer stratification has facilitated a precise clinical classification of patients undergoing radical prostatectomy and highlighted the therapeutic potential of targeting estrogen signaling in prostate cancer.

Assessing the cytotoxic potential of glycoalkaloidic extract in nanoparticles against bladder cancer cells.

OBJECTIVE: This study proposed to use the nanotechnology to deliver glycoalkaloidic extract (AE) to bladder cancer cells, evaluating their activity in 2D and 3D models and the biological mechanism of cell death. METHODS: NPs were prepared by nanoprecipitation method using polylactic acid (PLA) and characterized considering their size, charge, particle concentration and stability. The cytotoxicity was evaluated in 2D and 3D model, and the apoptosis and cell cycle were investigated using flow cytometry. KEY FINDINGS: NPs loading AE (NP-AE) had diameter around 125 ± 6 nm (PdI <0.1) and negative charge. The encapsulation efficiency of SM and SS was higher than 85% for both compounds. The obtained formulation showed a significant in-vitro cytotoxic effect against RT4 cells in a dose-dependent manner with IC50 two fold lower than the free AE. The cytotoxic effect of NP-AE was mediated by apoptosis and cell cycle arrested in the S phase. RT4 cells cultured under 3D conditions exhibited a higher resistance to the treatments (IC50 ~ three fold higher than in 2D cell culture). CONCLUSION: The NP-AE might be a promising nanocarrier to load and deliver glycoalkaloids against bladder cancer.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of bone metabolism in prostate adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Osteoporosis could be associated with the hormone therapy for metastatic prostate carcinoma (PCa) and with PCa per se. The objective of this review is to determine the incidence of bone loss and osteoporosis in patients with PCa who are or are not treated with hormone therapy (ADT). METHODS: The Medline, Embase, Cancerlit, and American Society of Clinical Oncology Abstract databases were searched for published studies on prostate cancer and bone metabolism. The outcomes assessed were: fracture, osteoporosis and osteopenia. RESULTS: Thirty-two articles (116,911 participants) were included in the meta-analysis. PCa patients under ADT had a higher risk of osteoporosis (RR, 1.30; p < 0.00001) and a higher risk of fractures (RR, 1.17; p < 0.00001) as compared to patients not under ADT. The total bone mineral density was lower in patients under ADT when compared with patients not under ADT (p = 0.031) but it was similar to bone mineral density found in healthy controls (p = 0.895). The time of androgen deprivation therapy correlated negatively with lumbar spine and total hip bone mineral density (Spearman's rho = -0.490 and -0.773; p = 0.028 and 0.001, respectively) and with total hip t score (Spearman's rho = -0.900; p = 0.037). CONCLUSION: We found consistent evidence that the use of androgen deprivation therapy in patients with PCa reduces bone mineral density, increasing the risk of fractures in these patients.