Quality of life endpoints in cancer cachexia clinical trials: Systematic review 3 of the cachexia endpoints series.

The use of patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) of quality of life (QOL) is common in cachexia trials. Patients' self-report on health, functioning, wellbeing, and perceptions of care, represent important measures of efficacy. This review describes the frequency, variety, and reporting of QOL endpoints used in cancer cachexia clinical trials. Electronic literature searches were performed in Medline, Embase, and Cochrane (1990-2023). Seven thousand four hundred thirty-five papers were retained for evaluation. Eligibility criteria included QOL as a study endpoint using validated measures, controlled design, adults (>18 years), ≥40 participants randomized, and intervention exceeding 2 weeks. The Covidence software was used for review procedures and data extractions. Four independent authors screened all records for consensus. Papers were screened by titles and abstracts, prior to full-text reading. PRISMA guidance for systematic reviews was followed. The protocol was prospectively registered via PROSPERO (CRD42022276710). Fifty papers focused on QOL. Twenty-four (48%) were double-blind randomized controlled trials. Sample sizes varied considerably (n = 42 to 469). Thirty-nine trials (78%) included multiple cancer types. Twenty-seven trials (54%) featured multimodal interventions with various drugs and dietary supplements, 11 (22%) used nutritional interventions alone and 12 (24%) used a single pharmacological intervention only. The median duration of the interventions was 12 weeks (4-96). The most frequent QOL measure was the EORTC QLQ-C30 (60%), followed by different FACIT questionnaires (34%). QOL was a primary, secondary, or exploratory endpoint in 15, 31 and 4 trials respectively, being the single primary in six. Statistically significant results on one or more QOL items favouring the intervention group were found in 18 trials. Eleven of these used a complete multidimensional measure. Adjustments for multiple testing when using multicomponent QOL measures were not reported. Nine trials (18%) defined a statistically or clinically significant difference for QOL, five with QOL as a primary outcome, and four with QOL as a secondary outcome. Correlation statistics with other study outcomes were rarely performed. PROMs including QOL are important endpoints in cachexia trials. We recommend using well-validated QOL measures, including cachexia-specific items such as weight history, appetite loss, and nutritional intake. Appropriate statistical methods with definitions of clinical significance, adjustment for multiple testing and few co-primary endpoints are encouraged, as is an understanding of how interventions may relate to changes in QOL endpoints. A strategic and scientific-based approach to PROM research in cachexia trials is warranted, to improve the research base in this field and avoid the use of QOL as supplementary measures.

Appetite and dietary intake endpoints in cancer cachexia clinical trials: Systematic Review 2 of the cachexia endpoints series.

There is no consensus on the optimal endpoint(s) in cancer cachexia trials. Endpoint variation is an obstacle when comparing interventions and their clinical value. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize and evaluate endpoints used to assess appetite and dietary intake in cancer cachexia clinical trials. A search for studies published from 1 January 1990 until 2 June 2021 was conducted using MEDLINE, Embase and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Eligible studies examined cancer cachexia treatment versus a comparator in adults with assessments of appetite and/or dietary intake as study endpoints, a sample size ≥40 and an intervention lasting ≥14 days. Reporting was in line with PRISMA guidance, and a protocol was published in PROSPERO (2022 CRD42022276710). This review is part of a series of systematic reviews examining cachexia endpoints. Of the 5975 articles identified, 116 were eligible for the wider review series and 80 specifically examined endpoints of appetite (65 studies) and/or dietary intake (21 studies). Six trials assessed both appetite and dietary intake. Appetite was the primary outcome in 15 trials and dietary intake in 7 trials. Median sample size was 101 patients (range 40-628). Forty-nine studies included multiple primary tumour sites, while 31 studies involved single primary tumour sites (15 gastrointestinal, 7 lung, 7 head and neck and 2 female reproductive organs). The most frequently reported appetite endpoints were visual analogue scale (VAS) and numerical rating scale (NRS) (40%). The appetite item from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ) C30/C15 PAL (38%) and the appetite question from North Central Cancer Treatment Group anorexia questionnaire (17%) were also frequently applied. Of the studies that assessed dietary intake, 13 (62%) used food records (prospective registrations) and 10 (48%) used retrospective methods (24-h recall or dietary history). For VAS/NRS, a mean change of 1.3 corresponded to Hedge's g of 0.5 and can be considered a moderate change. For food records, a mean change of 231 kcal/day or 11 g of protein/day corresponded to a moderate change. Choice of endpoint in cachexia trials will depend on factors pertinent to the trial to be conducted. Nevertheless, from trials assessed and available literature, NRS or EORTC QLQ C30/C15 PAL seems suitable for appetite assessments. Appetite and dietary intake endpoints are rarely used as primary outcomes in cancer cachexia. Dietary intake assessments were used mainly to monitor compliance and are not validated in cachexia populations. Given the importance to cachexia studies, dietary intake endpoints must be validated before they are used as endpoints in clinical trials.

Prostaglandin E2 upregulates EGF-stimulated signaling in mitogenic pathways involving Akt and ERK in hepatocytes.

Prostaglandins (PGs) such as PGE2 enhance proliferation in many cells, apparently through several distinct mechanisms, including transactivation of the epidermal growth factor (EGF) receptor (EGFR) as well as EGFR-independent pathways. In this study we found that in primary cultures of rat hepatocytes PGE2 did not induce phosphorylation of the EGFR, and the EGFR tyrosine kinase blockers gefitinib and AG1478 did not affect PGE2-stimulated phosphorylation of ERK1/2. In contrast, PGE2 elicited EGFR phosphorylation and EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor-sensitive ERK phosphorylation in MH1C1 hepatoma cells. These findings suggest that PGE2 elicits EGFR transactivation in MH1C1 cells but not in hepatocytes. Treatment of the hepatocytes with PGE2 at 3 h after plating amplified the stimulatory effect on DNA synthesis of EGF administered at 24 h and advanced and augmented the cyclin D1 expression in response to EGF in hepatocytes. The pretreatment of the hepatocytes with PGE2 resulted in an increase in the magnitude of EGF-stimulated Akt phosphorylation and ERK1/2 phosphorylation and kinase activity, including an extended duration of the responses, particularly of ERK, to EGF in PGE2-treated cells. Pertussis toxin abolished the ability of PGE2 to enhance the Akt and ERK responses to EGF. The results suggest that in hepatocytes, unlike MH1C1 hepatoma cells, PGE2 does not transactivate the EGFR, but instead acts in synergism with EGF by modulating mitogenic mechanisms downstream of the EGFR. These effects seem to be at least in part G(i) protein-mediated and include upregulation of signaling in the PI3K/Akt and the Ras/ERK pathways.

Prostaglandins enhance epidermal growth factor-induced DNA synthesis in hepatocytes by stimulation of E prostanoid 3 and F prostanoid receptors.

Prostaglandins stimulate hepatocyte proliferation in vivo and in vitro. We have examined the role of E prostanoid (EP) and F prostanoid receptors (FP) in enhancing the growth-stimulatory effect of epidermal growth factor (EGF) in cultured hepatocytes. The EP2 receptor agonist butaprost had no significant effect on EGF-induced DNA synthesis. EP1 receptor-selective antagonists did not affect the enhancement by prostaglandin E(2) of EGF-stimulated DNA synthesis. Sulprostone, misoprostol, and fluprostenol strongly enhanced DNA synthesis and inhibited glucagon-stimulated cAMP accumulation, indicating that they all activated EP3 receptors. Sulprostone and fluprostenol, and to a lesser extent misoprostol, stimulated accumulation of inositol phosphates. The effects of fluprostenol and sulprostone on phospholipase C (PLC) were inhibited by the FP receptor antagonist AL-8810 [9 alpha, 15R-dihydroxy-11 beta-fluoro-15-(2,3-dihydro-1H-inden-2-yl)-16,17,18,19,20-pentanor-prosta-5Z, 13E-dien-1-oic acid], indicating that this effect was mediated by FP receptors. Inhibition of protein kinase C with GF109203X [2-[1-(3-dimetylaminopropyl)-1H-indol-3-yl]-maleimide] resulted in a partial reduction of the growth stimulation induced by fluprostenol, indicating a minor role of FP receptors. Combining fluprostenol with misoprostol, but not with sulprostone, resulted in partially additive effects on DNA synthesis, suggesting that both EP3 and FP receptors are involved. Combining sulprostone with misoprostol did not result in additive effects on DNA synthesis, suggesting that EP4 receptors were not involved. We conclude that, although a minor effect is exerted by FP receptors, the growth-stimulatory effects of prostaglandins in rat hepatocytes are mediated mainly by EP3 receptors. We have found no evidence of EP1 receptor involvement.

Ca2+-mediated activation of ERK in hepatocytes by norepinephrine and prostaglandin F2 alpha: role of calmodulin and Src kinases.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that several agents that stimulate heptahelical G-protein coupled receptors activate the extracellular signal regulated kinases ERK1 (p44mapk) and ERK2 (p42mapk) in hepatocytes. The molecular pathways that convey their signals to ERK1/2 are only partially clarified. In the present study we have explored the role of Ca2+ and Ca2+-dependent steps leading to ERK1/2 activation induced by norepinephrine and prostaglandin (PG)F2alpha. RESULTS: Pretreatment of the cells with the Ca2+ chelators BAPTA-AM or EGTA, as well as the Ca2+ influx inhibitor gadolinium, resulted in a partial decrease of the ERK response. Furthermore, the calmodulin antagonists W-7, trifluoperazine, and J-8 markedly decreased ERK activation. Pretreatment with KN-93, an inhibitor of the multifunctional Ca2+/calmodulin-dependent protein kinase, had no effect on ERK activation. The Src kinase inhibitors PP1 and PP2 partially diminished the ERK responses elicited by both norepinephrine and PGF2alpha. CONCLUSION: The present data indicate that Ca2+ is involved in ERK activation induced by hormones acting on G protein-coupled receptors in hepatocytes, and suggest that calmodulin and Src kinases might play a role in these signaling pathways.