Differential clonal evolution in oesophageal cancers in response to neo-adjuvant chemotherapy.

How chemotherapy affects carcinoma genomes is largely unknown. Here we report whole-exome and deep sequencing of 30 paired oesophageal adenocarcinomas sampled before and after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. Most, but not all, good responders pass through genetic bottlenecks, a feature associated with higher mutation burden pre-treatment. Some poor responders pass through bottlenecks, but re-grow by the time of surgical resection, suggesting a missed therapeutic opportunity. Cancers often show major changes in driver mutation presence or frequency after treatment, owing to outgrowth persistence or loss of sub-clones, copy number changes, polyclonality and/or spatial genetic heterogeneity. Post-therapy mutation spectrum shifts are also common, particularly C>A and TT>CT changes in good responders or bottleneckers. Post-treatment samples may also acquire mutations in known cancer driver genes (for example, SF3B1, TAF1 and CCND2) that are absent from the paired pre-treatment sample. Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy can rapidly and profoundly affect the oesophageal adenocarcinoma genome. Monitoring molecular changes during treatment may be clinically useful.

Clinical Trial of Oral Nelfinavir before and during Radiation Therapy for Advanced Rectal Cancer.

PURPOSE: Nelfinavir, a PI3K pathway inhibitor, is a radiosensitizer that increases tumor blood flow in preclinical models. We conducted an early-phase study to demonstrate the safety of nelfinavir combined with hypofractionated radiotherapy (RT) and to develop biomarkers of tumor perfusion and radiosensitization for this combinatorial approach. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Ten patients with T3-4 N0-2 M1 rectal cancer received 7 days of oral nelfinavir (1,250 mg b.i.d.) and a further 7 days of nelfinavir during pelvic RT (25 Gy/5 fractions/7 days). Perfusion CT (p-CT) and DCE-MRI scans were performed pretreatment, after 7 days of nelfinavir and prior to the last fraction of RT. Biopsies taken pretreatment and 7 days after the last fraction of RT were analyzed for tumor cell density (TCD). RESULTS: There were 3 drug-related grade 3 adverse events: diarrhea, rash, and lymphopenia. On DCE-MRI, there was a mean 42% increase in medianKtrans, and a corresponding median 30% increase in mean blood flow on p-CT during RT in combination with nelfinavir. Median TCD decreased from 24.3% at baseline to 9.2% in biopsies taken 7 days after RT (P= 0.01). Overall, 5 of 9 evaluable patients exhibited good tumor regression on MRI assessed by tumor regression grade (mrTRG). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to evaluate nelfinavir in combination with RT without concurrent chemotherapy. It has shown that nelfinavir-RT is well tolerated and is associated with increased blood flow to rectal tumors. The efficacy of nelfinavir-RT versus RT alone merits clinical evaluation, including measurement of tumor blood flow.

XPF protein levels determine sensitivity of malignant melanoma cells to oxaliplatin chemotherapy: suitability as a biomarker for patient selection.

As the options for systemic treatment of malignant melanoma (MM) increase, the need to develop biomarkers to identify patients who might benefit from cytotoxic chemotherapy becomes more apparent. In preclinical models, oxaliplatin has activity in cisplatin-resistant cells. In this study, we have shown that oxaliplatin forms interstrand crosslinks (ICLs) in cellular DNA and that loss of the heterodimeric structure-specific endonuclease XPF-ERCC1 causes hypersensitivity to oxaliplatin in mammalian cells. XPF deficiency resulted in late S-phase arrest and persistence of double-strand breaks following oxaliplatin treatment. In a panel of 12 MM cell lines, oxaliplatin sensitivity correlated with XPF and ERCC1 protein levels. The knockdown of ERCC1 and XPF protein levels by RNA interference increased sensitivity of cancer cells to oxaliplatin; overexpression of exogenous ERCC1 significantly decreased drug sensitivity. Following immunohistochemical optimization, XPF protein levels were quantified in MM tissue samples from 183 patients, showing variation in expression and no correlation with prognosis. In 57 patients with MM treated with cisplatin or carboplatin, XPF protein levels did not predict the likelihood of clinical response. We propose that oxaliplatin should not be discarded as a potential treatment for MM on the basis of the limited activity of cisplatin in unselected patients. Moreover, we show that XPF-ERCC1 protein levels are a key determinant of the sensitivity of melanoma cells to oxaliplatin in vitro. Immunohistochemical detection of XPF appears suitable for development as a tissue biomarker for potentially selecting patients for oxaliplatin treatment in a prospective clinical trial.

Is less clinical research being published by surgeons in the United Kingdom?

INTRODUCTION: Concerns about the decline of surgical research have been expressed in parallel to the debate on the future of academic surgery in the United Kingdom. The aim of this study was to survey the output of UK surgeons in ten high impact general surgical journals between 1987 and 2009 to estimate whether less clinical academic activity is occurring. METHODS: Ten general surgical journals with consistently the highest impact factors (1.2-7.9) were selected for review. All articles excepting letters and news articles were included in the study. The region of origin was identified for each paper and classified as USA, Japan, Europe, UK and Rest of the World (RoW). In articles from multiple centres, the region of the corresponding author was used. RESULTS: Over the study period, the annual number of surgical papers published from the UK dropped both in absolute values (from 286 to 214) and as a percentage of global output (17.7-8.8%). The USA also saw a drop (from 867 to 763/yr), while the output has increased steadily for Europe (from 266 to 822/yr) and RoW (from 151 to 476/yr). In 2009, the percentage of total yearly output was roughly equal for Europe and USA (31-33%), UK and Japan (7-8%). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggests that clinical surgical research in the UK has suffered over the last 20 years. The declining emphasis on research as part of surgical training, the strategic decisions about fund allocation, and the increasing role of centres from Europe and RoW may all play a role. This limited "snapshot" fails to provide information on the output in journals focused on basic science. As more of the current research involves collaborations between clinicians and non-clinicians it is likely that many more papers were published in such journals during the period analysed. It remains to be monitored whether recent initiatives will strengthen academic surgery in the UK in future years.