Chemotherapy resistance and oncogene expression in non-small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Empiric chemotherapy for patients with non-small cell lung cancer who have undergone resection is recommended without knowledge of the tumor's specific biologic characteristics, and many patients may not benefit. In vitro chemotherapy resistance is associated with clinical unresponsiveness in some tumors, and in lung cancer, chemotherapy resistance is prevalent. Multiple-agent chemotherapy resistance and association of chemotherapy resistance with molecular markers are described. METHODS: Chemotherapy resistance to doublets--carboplatin and paclitaxel, cisplatin and navelbline, cisplatin and docetaxel, and cisplatin and gemcitabine--was analyzed in 4571 non-small cell lung cancer tumors with the extreme drug resistance assay. Chemotherapy resistance is defined as follows: extreme drug resistance, 1 SD above the median chemotherapy resistance; intermediate drug resistance, between the median and extreme drug resistances; and low drug resistance, 1 SD below the median. Chemotherapy resistance was compared with DNA ploidy measured by flow cytometry, and markers p53 and epithelial growth factor receptor were assayed by immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: Tumors with extreme or intermediate drug resistance were noted in 30% to carboplatin-paclitaxel, in 24% to cisplatin-navelbline, in 42% to cisplatin-gemcitabine, and in 27% to cisplatin-docetaxel. Extreme or intermediate drug resistance to at least one drug occurred in 74% to carboplatin-paclitaxel, in 68% to cisplatin-navelbline, in 88% to cisplatin-gemcitabine, and in 68% to cisplatin-docetaxel. More intermediate plus extreme chemotherapy resistances occurred in aneuploid tumors to etoposide (53% vs 36%, P = .0002) and topotecan (48% vs 36%, P = .0094), with less intermediate or extreme chemotherapy resistance to gemcitabine (88% vs 81%, P = .0345). p53-Positive tumors had more intermediate or extreme resistance to etoposide (57% vs 44%, P = .0009) and doxorubicin (73% vs. 58%, P = .0324) and less intermediate or extreme resistance to cisplatin (44% vs 54%, P = .0125), to carboplatin (47% vs 57%, P = .0129), to taxol (47% vs 57%, P = .0056), and to gemcitabine (78% vs 87%, P = .0108). Fewer epithelial growth factor receptor-positive tumors were extremely drug resistant to cisplatin (13% vs 26%, P = .0074) and carboplatin (13% v. 30%, P = .0008). CONCLUSIONS: Multi-drug chemotherapy resistance in non-small cell lung cancer tumor cultures is common, and associations between molecular markers and in vitro chemotherapy resistance are noted. Clinical validation through integration of such testing into clinical trials seems warranted.

Androgen and c-Kit receptors in desmoplastic small round cell tumors resistant to chemotherapy: novel targets for therapy.

PURPOSE: Desmoplastic small round cell tumor (DSRCT) is a highly fatal, mainly peritoneal cell origin cancer which predominantly affects young adult males. This predilection in young males led us to examine the role of androgen receptors (AR), testosterone, and growth factors in the biology of DSRCT. METHODS: Slides were prepared from 27 multi-institutional patients all with end-stage DSRCT. Slides were stained for AR, c-Kit, various growth factors, and drug resistance-associated proteins. Immunohistochemical (IHC) expression was scored semi-quantitatively. Western blot and MTT studies were performed to validate the IHC findings of over-expression of the AR and its functional status by stimulation of growth by dihydrotestosterone, respectively. Six patients with positive AR status were treated solely with combined androgen blockade (CAB) as used for prostate cancer. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were male (81%) and five were female (19%) with a median age at diagnosis of 23. All patients had failed at least two prior multi-agent chemotherapy regimens and 44% had progressed after autologous stem cell transplant. DSRCT samples from 10 of 27 patients were >or=2+ IHC positive for AR (37%,P=0.0045) and 7 of 20 patients were >or=2+ IHC positive for c-Kit (35%, P=0.018). We found elevated IHC expression of GST-pi, MRP and thymidylate synthase in smaller subsets of patients. In vitro studies for AR by Western blot and stimulation of growth by dihydrotestosterone in MTT assays suggest that the AR in DSRCT cells is functional. Six patients with positive AR status were treated with CAB alone and three of six attained clinical benefit (1-PR, 1-MR, 1-SD) in a range of 3-4 months. The three patients who responded to CAB had normal testosterone levels before CAB, while the three who did not respond to CAB had baseline castrate levels of testosterone. CONCLUSIONS: DSRCT has significant IHC expression of AR and c-Kit in heavily pre-treated patients. The presence of significant AR expression in 37% suggests that these patients could possibly respond to CAB. The significance of c-Kit expression in 35% of DSRCT patients is unknown and warrants further investigation.

Conservation of in vitro drug resistance patterns in epithelial ovarian carcinoma.

PURPOSE: To compare the in vitro drug resistance profiles of advanced stage primary and recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer specimens using the tritiated thymidine uptake assay. METHODS: Extreme drug resistance (EDR) to cisplatin, paclitaxel, 4-hydroxycyclophosphamide, and topotecan was determined for an unselected population of primary and metastatic malignant ovarian tissues, synchronous tumors (primary and metastatic tissues obtained from the same patient at diagnosis), and metachronous lesions (specimens from the same patient before and after chemotherapy). RESULTS: For the large unselected population of malignant tissues (total, N = 6990; primary ovarian, N = 2031; metastatic ovarian, N = 4959), no statistically significant differences were discovered between primary tissues and metastatic lesions when a comparison was made between the percentage of tumors from each group that exhibited extreme drug resistance to the agents assayed. From the library of 6990 specimens, 119 synchronous pairings were identified. These synchronous lesions did not differ significantly in the %EDR between primary and metastatic sites in the same patient; approximately 10% shifted between low drug resistance and EDR. A total of 334 metachronous pairings were identified and the percentage of tissues that exhibited EDR also failed to show a significant difference when primary tumors were compared with matched recurrences in the same patient. CONCLUSIONS: For the agents studied, acquired resistance was not a function of disease site. In vitro drug resistance observed at recurrence was not influenced significantly by intervening therapy. It is possible that assay results at diagnosis could be used to guide subsequent therapy at relapse, especially when recurrent tissue is not available for analysis.

In vitro chemoresistance and biomarker profiles are unique for histologic subtypes of epithelial ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether there is a relationship between histologic subtype of epithelial ovarian cancer and chemoresistance, we evaluated ovarian carcinomas of six histologic subtypes and correlated histology with in vitro drug response. Biomarker profiles (p53, Her-2 neu, and EGFR) were also evaluated to determine if their expression patterns were associated with histology. METHODS: In vitro drug response profiles for different histologic subsets of epithelial ovarian carcinomas exposed to standard relevant chemotherapy agents were determined in the Extreme Drug Resistance assay (EDR). Immunohistochemistry techniques were employed to determine biomarker expression. RESULTS: Of 5195 referred serial cases of epithelial ovarian cancer, there were 2660 papillary serous, 303 endometrioid, 142 mucinous, 102 clear cell, 952 undifferentiated carcinomas, and 42 tumors of low malignant potential. For the samples as a whole, the incidences of extreme drug resistance to the tested chemotherapeutic agents were cisplatin 10%, carboplatin 16%, cyclophosphamide 16%, doxorubicin 40%, gemcitabine 21%, paclitaxel 22%, and topotecan 13%. When compared to papillary serous tumors, mucinous tumors were more frequently resistant to cisplatin (10% vs. 18%) but less frequently resistant to topotecan (13% vs. 5%) and doxorubicin (42% vs. 16%). Endometrioid tumors were less resistant to cisplatin (10% vs. 6%) and doxorubicin (42% vs. 20%). Clear cell and undifferentiated tumors had the lowest rates of EDR to paclitaxel (13% and 18%) and cyclophosphamide (7% and 11%), while borderline tumors showed high rates of EDR to these agents (52% and 63%, respectively). With respect to biomarker profiles, mP53 was detected in 46%, Her-2 neu in 16%, and EGFR in 30% of the cases evaluated. As compared to all other subtypes, clear cell carcinomas had significantly higher Her-2 neu expression (19%). Relative to papillary serous carcinomas, borderline tumors exhibited significantly lower rates of mP53 expression (60% vs.17%). CONCLUSIONS: We found significant differences in the frequencies of extreme drug resistance to chemotherapeutic agents and biomarker expression among histologic subtypes of epithelial ovarian cancer. The data collected in this investigation may provide a guide for stratification of patients entering clinical trials based on histology and biomarker expression.