Compensatory combination of romidepsin with gemcitabine and cisplatin to effectively and safely control urothelial carcinoma.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Human urothelial carcinoma (UC) has a high tendency to recur and progress to life-threatening advanced diseases. Advanced therapeutic regimens are needed to control UC development and recurrence.Methods
We pursued in vitro and in vivo studies to understand the ability of a triple combination of gemcitabine, romidepsin, and cisplatin (Gem+Rom+Cis) to modulate signalling pathways, cell death, drug resistance, and tumour development.Results
Our studies verified the ability of Gem+Rom+Cis to synergistically induce apoptotic cell death and reduce drug resistance in various UC cells. The ERK pathway and reactive oxygen species (ROS) played essential roles in mediating Gem+Rom+Cis-induced caspase activation, DNA oxidation and damage, glutathione reduction, and unfolded protein response. Gem+Rom+Cis preferentially induced death and reduced drug resistance in oncogenic H-Ras-expressing UC vs. counterpart cells that was associated with transcriptomic profiles related to ROS, cell death, and drug resistance. Our studies also verified the efficacy and safety of the Gem plus Rom+Cis regimen in controlling UC cell-derived xenograft tumour development and resistance.Conclusions
More than 80% of UCs are associated with aberrant Ras-ERK pathway. Thus the compensatory combination of Rom with Gem and Cis should be seriously considered as an advanced regimen for treating advanced UCs, especially Ras-ERK-activated UCs.
SUBMITTER: Pattarawat P
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7374627 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundCisplatin-based combination chemotherapy is standard first-line treatment for patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC). Molecular profiling studies reveal that the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway is altered in a significant percentage of UCs.ObjectiveWe conducted a phase I trial to evaluate the feasibility of combining the mTOR inhibitor everolimus with gemcitabine and split-dose cisplatin (GC) in advanced UC in the first-line setting.MethodsPatients received gemcitabine 800 mg/m2 and cisplatin 35 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8 of 21-day cycles for a total of 6 cycles in combination with everolimus at increasing dose levels (DL1:5 mg QOD, DL2:5 mg daily, DL3:10 mg daily) following a standard 3+3 design. Responses were assessed every 2 cycles. Patients with at least stable disease (SD) continued everolimus until progression. Goals were to establish dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) for the combination.Results12 patients were enrolled, 3 at DL1, 3 at DL2, and an additional 6 at DL1 *(DL1 following de-escalation). 3/3 patients at DL2 had DLTs during cycle 1. 2/8 evaluable patients at DL1/DL1 * had DLTs during cycle 1. DLTs were primarily hematologic. Further toxicities, also primarily hematologic, were observed during later treatment cycles, leading to 8 chemotherapy dose reductions overall. Partial responses were observed in 4/10 evaluable patients, and SD in 5/10. Median overall survival was 10.8 months (95% CI 6.9, not reached).ConclusionsThe maximum tolerated dose was reached at the lowest dose level, 5 mg QOD, for everolimus in combination with gemcitabine and split-dose cisplatin in advanced UC. The regimen was limited by hematologic toxicity.
| S-EPMC4927849 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposePatients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma are often ineligible for cisplatin-based treatments. A National Cancer Institute Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program-sponsored trial assessed the tolerability and efficacy of a gemcitabine-eribulin combination in this population.MethodsPatients with treatment-naïve advanced or recurrent metastatic urothelial carcinoma of the bladder, ureter, or urethra not amenable to curative surgery and not candidates for cisplatin-based therapy were eligible. Cisplatin ineligibility was defined as creatinine clearance less than 60 mL/min (but ≥ 30 mL/min), grade 2 neuropathy, or grade 2 hearing loss. Treatment was gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 intravenously followed by eribulin 1.4 mg/m2, both on days 1 and 8, repeated in 21-day cycles until progression or unacceptable toxicity. A Simon two-stage phase II trial design was used to distinguish between Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1 objective response rates of 20% versus 50%.ResultsBetween June 2015 and March 2017, 24 eligible patients with a median age of 73 years (range, 62 to 88 years) underwent therapy. Performance status of 0, 1, or 2 was seen in 11, 11, and two patients, respectively. Sites of disease included: lymph nodes, 16; lungs, nine; liver, seven; bladder, five; bones, two. Median number of cycles received was four (range, one to 16). Of 24 patients, 12 were confirmed responders; the observed objective response rate was 50% (95% CI, 29% to 71%). Median overall survival was 11.9 months (95% CI, 5.6 to 20.4 months), and median progression-free survival was 5.3 months (95% CI, 4.5 to 6.7 months). The most common treatment-related any-grade toxicities were fatigue (83% of patients), neutropenia (79%), anemia (63%), alopecia (50%), elevated AST (50%), and constipation, nausea, and thrombocytopenia (42% each).ConclusionGemcitabine-eribulin treatment response and survival for cisplatin-ineligible patients compare favorably to other regimens. Additional research is needed.
| S-EPMC7006847 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInvasive urothelial carcinoma (UC) with squamous and glandular differentiation is a highly malignant and complicated pathological subtype, and the standard care is radical cystectomy (RC). However, urinary diversion after RC significantly reduces patient quality of life, thus bladder-sparing therapy has become a research hotspot in this field. Recently, five immune checkpoint inhibitors have been approved for systemic therapy of locally advanced or metastatic bladder cancer by the Food and Drug Administration, but the efficacy of immunotherapy combined with chemotherapy for invasive UC is still unknown, especially for pathological subtypes with squamous and glandular differentiation.Case summaryWe report the case of a 60-year-old male who complained of repetitive painless gross hematuria and was diagnosed with muscle-invasive bladder cancer with squamous and glandular differentiation, defined as cT3N1M0 according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer, who had a strong desire to preserve the bladder. Immunohistochemical staining revealed that programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression in the tumor was positive. Thus, a transurethral resection to maximize removal of the bladder tumor was performed under cystoscopy, and the patient subsequently received a combination of chemotherapy (cisplatin/gemcitabine) and immunotherapy (tislelizumab) treatment. No tumor recurrence in the bladder was observed following pathological and imaging examination after 2 cycles and 4 cycles of treatment, respectively. The patient achieved bladder preservation and has been tumor-free for more than two years.ConclusionThis case shows that the combination of chemotherapy and immunotherapy might be an effective and safe treatment strategy for PD-L1 expression positive UC with divergent histologic differentiation.
| S-EPMC9979306 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cisplatin-based systemic chemotherapy is the gold-standard approach for the first-line treatment of patients with advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC). However, the optimal number of cycles is still unclear. The current study retrospectively assessed the clinical outcome in patients who received gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) chemotherapy as first-line treatment for metastatic urothelial cancer to clarify the timing of switching from GC therapy. A total of 61 patients with locally advanced or metastatic UC who received first-line chemotherapy with GC were retrospectively reviewed at National Hospital Organization Kyushu Cancer Center between June 2009 and August 2017. The progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The significance of associations between the clinical parameters and OS was assessed using the Cox proportional hazards regression model. The median cycle number for GC chemotherapy was 4. The median PFS and OS of all cases was 5.2 and 14.1 months, respectively. The multivariate analyses revealed that a neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio ?3.0 (hazard ratio [HR], 2.521, 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.179-5.624; P=0.017) and best response to GC therapy of CR+PR (HR 0.110; 95% CI=0.028-0.411; P<0.001) were independent prognostic factors. However, the number of GC cycles (?4 vs. >4) was not an independent prognostic factor (P=0.387). The current retrospective study indicated that changes to therapy should be considered at an early stage for cases with a therapeutic effect of SD or less, regardless of the number of GC therapy cycles.
| S-EPMC7074169 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEpidermal growth factor receptor overexpression is associated with poor outcomes in urothelial carcinoma (UC). Cetuximab (CTX) exhibited an antitumor effect in in vivo UC models. The efficacy of gemcitabine/cisplatin (GC) with or without CTX in patients with advanced UC was evaluated.MethodsPatients with advanced UC, measurable disease, and adequate organ function were randomized 1:2 to cisplatin (70 mg/m(2) ) on day 1 plus gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2) ) on days 1, 8, and 15 (arm A) or GC plus CTX (500 mg/m(2) ) on days 1 and 15 (arm B). The primary endpoint was the overall response rate. The secondary endpoints were the response duration, safety, progression-free survival, overall survival, determination of whether or not CTX sensitized nonresponders to GC, and exploratory biomarker analysis. The accrual targets were 27 and 54 patients for the 2 arms, respectively. The overall response rate was reported by arm with binomial confidence intervals (CIs). Kaplan-Meier methods were used for time-to-event endpoints.ResultsEighty-eight eligible patients were randomized; 87 were toxicity-evaluable, and 85 were response-evaluable. The overall response rates were 57.1% for arm A (95% CI = 37%-76%) and 61.4% for arm B (95% CI = 48%-74%). The median progression-free survival times were 8.5 months for arm A (95% CI = 5.7-10.4 months) and 7.6 months for arm B (95% CI = 6.1-8.7 months). The median overall survival times were 17.4 months for arm A (95% CI = 12.8 months to unreached) and 14.3 months for arm B (95% CI = 11.6-22.2 months). The most common grade 3/grade 4 adverse events in both arms were myelosuppression and nausea. Thromboembolism, acneiform rash, fatigue, pain, hypersensitivity reactions, elevated transaminases, hyponatremia, and hypomagnesemia were more common in arm B; 3 grade 5 adverse events occurred in arm B. The presence of primary disease significantly correlated with thromboembolism. An increased soluble E-cadherin level after cycle 2 correlated with a higher risk of death.ConclusionsGC plus CTX was feasible but was associated with more adverse events and no improvements in outcomes.
| S-EPMC4142676 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOutcomes with current chemotherapy in metastatic urothelial carcinoma (MUC) remain poor. Lenalidomide, an antiangiogenic and immunomodulatory agent, enhances the effects of chemotherapy in preclinical studies. In this phase Ib/II study, we sought to determine a tolerable dose of lenalidomide in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin (GCL) in patients with MUC and to explore the safety and activity of this regimen.MethodsPatients with chemotherapy-naïve MUC received gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8 and cisplatin 70 mg/m(2) on day 1 every 21 days. In phase Ib, there were four planned escalating dose levels of lenalidomide (10, 15, 20, and 25 mg) daily on days 1-14.ResultsSeven patients received GCL in phase Ib. The dose of lenalidomide was not escalated beyond 10 mg because of cytopenias requiring repeated dose delays and reductions. Two additional patients were enrolled in phase II, but the study was ultimately terminated due to poor tolerability and slow accrual. The most frequent grade ≥ 3 adverse events were cytopenias and diarrhea. Three of the nine patients experienced an objective response (one complete response, two partial responses).ConclusionChronic administration of the GCL regimen was poorly tolerated because of additive and cumulative myelosuppression.
| S-EPMC4153455 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTo assess the safety and efficacy of gemcitabine and cisplatin as neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by selective bladder preservation chemoradiotherapy in muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC).Materials and methodsPatients with clinical T2-T4aN0M0 MIBC eligible for radical cystectomy and cisplatin-based chemotherapy were treated with gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m² on days 1, 8 and 15, and cisplatin 70 mg/m² on day 1 every 28 days for 3 cycles. After clinical re-staging with computed tomography scans and cystoscopy, patients with clinical complete response (CR) were eligible to proceed without cystectomy and receive bladder preservation chemoradiotherapy involving weekly cisplatin 10 mg/m² and up to 70.2 Gy of radiation. The primary endpoint of the present prospective phase II study was metastasis-free survival (MFS).ResultsBetween Oct 2017 and Nov 2019, a total of 138 MIBC patients were enrolled and treated with neoadjuvant gemcitabine/cisplatin. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was well-tolerated, with fatigue, nausea, and pruritus being the most commonly observed adverse events. After completion of planned neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 54 patients with a clinical CR and 10 patients who did not have CR but refused surgery received bladder preservation chemoradiotherapy. With a median follow-up duration of 34 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 32%-36%), the 3-year MFS rate in 64 chemoradiotherapy patients was calculated to be 70% (95% CI, 58%-82%).ConclusionsNeoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by selective bladder preservation chemoradiotherapy based on the clinical CR was feasible and efficacious in the treatment of MIBC.
| S-EPMC8902424 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposePreclinical data indicate that DNA methyltransferase inhibition will circumvent cisplatin resistance in various cancers.Patient and methodsSPIRE comprised a dose-escalation phase for incurable metastatic solid cancers, followed by a randomized dose expansion phase for neoadjuvant treatment of T2-4a N0 M0 bladder urothelial carcinoma. The primary objective was a recommended phase II dose (RP2D) for guadecitabine combined with gemcitabine and cisplatin. Treatment comprised 21-day gemcitabine and cisplatin cycles (cisplatin 70 mg/m2, i.v., day 8 and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2, i.v., days 8 + 15). Guadecitabine was injected subcutaneously on days 1-5, within escalation phase cohorts, and to half of 20 patients in the expansion phase. Registration ID: ISRCTN 16332228.ResultsWithin the escalation phase, dose-limiting toxicities related predominantly to myelosuppression requiring G-CSF prophylaxis from cohort 2 (guadecitabine 20 mg/m2, days 1-5). The most common grade ≥3 adverse events in 17 patients in the dose-escalation phase were neutropenia (76.5%), thrombocytopenia (64.7%), leukopenia (29.4%), and anemia (29.4%). Addition of guadecitabine to gemcitabine and cisplatin in the expansion phase resulted in similar rates of severe hematologic adverse events, similar cisplatin dose intensity, but modestly reduced gemcitabine dose intensity. Radical treatment options after chemotherapy were not compromised. Pharmacodynamics evaluations indicated guadecitabine maximal target effect at the point of cisplatin administration. Pharmacokinetics were consistent with prior data. No treatment-related deaths occurred.ConclusionsThe guadecitabine RP2D was 20 mg/m2, days 1-5, in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin and required GCSF prophylaxis. Gene promoter methylation pharmacodynamics are optimal with this schedule. Addition of guadecitabine to gemcitabine and cisplatin was tolerable, despite some additional myelosuppression, and warrants further investigation to assess efficacy.
| S-EPMC7611191 | biostudies-literature
Project description:UnlabelledGemcitabine and cisplatin chemotherapy (GC regimen) represents a standard treatment for advanced urothelial carcinoma. We performed an open-label, single-arm, non-randomised, phase 2 trial evaluating the addition of sunitinib to standard GC chemotherapy (SGC regimen). Overall, 63 treatment-naïve participants were recruited and received up to six 21-d cycles of cisplatin 70 mg/m2 (intravenously [IV], day 1) and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 (IV, days 1 and 8) combined with sunitinib 37.5 mg (orally, days 2-15). Following review of toxicity after the first six patients, the sunitinib dose was reduced to 25 mg for all patients. Overall response rate was 64%, with response noted in 37 of 58 patients. At 6 mo, 30 of 58 assessable patients (52%; 90% confidence interval [CI], 40-63%) were progression free. Median overall survival was 12 mo (95% CI, 9-15) and was heavily influenced by Bajorin prognostic group. Grade 3-4 toxicities were predominantly haematologic and limited the deliverability of the triple SGC regimen. The trial did not meet its prespecified primary end point of >60% patients progression free at 6 mo. Cumulative myelosuppression led to treatment delays of gemcitabine and cisplatin and dose reduction and/or withdrawal of sunitinib in the majority of cases. The triple-drug combination was not well tolerated. Phase 3 evaluation of the triple SGC regimen in advanced transitional cell carcinoma is not recommended.Patient summaryThe addition of sunitinib to standard cisplatin and gemcitabine chemotherapy was poorly tolerated and did not improve outcomes in advanced urothelial carcinoma. Treatment delivery was limited by myelotoxicity.
| S-EPMC4410296 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportancePreclinical studies suggest that inhibition of single-stranded DNA repair by ataxia telangiectasia and Rad3 (ATR) may enhance the cytotoxicity of cisplatin, gemcitabine, and other chemotherapeutic agents. Cisplatin with gemcitabine remains the standard up-front therapy for treatment in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer.ObjectiveTo determine whether the use of the selective ATR inhibitor, berzosertib, could augment the activity of cisplatin with gemcitabine.Design, setting, and participantsIn a phase 2 randomized clinical trial, 87 patients across 23 centers in the National Cancer Institute Experimental Therapeutics Clinical Trials Network were randomized to receive either cisplatin with gemcitabine alone (control arm) or cisplatin with gemcitabine plus berzosertib (experimental arm). Key eligibility criteria included confirmed metastatic urothelial cancer, no prior cytotoxic therapy for metastatic disease, 12 months or more since perioperative therapy, and eligibility for cisplatin receipt based on standard criteria. The study was conducted from January 27, 2017, to December 15, 2020.InterventionsIn the control arm, cisplatin, 70 mg/m2, was given on day 1 and gemcitabine, 1000 mg/m2, was given on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. In the experimental arm, cisplatin, 60 mg/m2, was given on day 1; gemcitabine, 875 mg/m2, on days 1 and 8; and berzosertib, 90 mg/m2, on days 2 and 9 of a 21-day cycle.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point of the study was progression-free survival. The analysis was on all patients who started therapy.ResultsOf the total of 87 patients randomized, 41 patients received cisplatin with gemcitabine alone and 46 received cisplatin with gemcitabine plus berzosertib. Median age was 67 (range, 32-84) years, and 68 patients (78%) were men. Median progression-free survival was 8.0 months for both arms (Bajorin risk-adjusted hazard ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.72-2.08). Median overall survival was shorter with cisplatin with gemcitabine plus berzosertib compared with cisplatin with gemcitabine alone (14.4 vs 19.8 months; Bajorin risk-adjusted hazard ratio, 1.42; 95% CI, 0.76-2.68). Higher rates of grade 3 vs grade 4 thrombocytopenia (59% vs 39%) and neutropenia (37% vs 27%) were observed with cisplatin with gemcitabine and berzosertib compared with cisplatin with gemcitabine alone; consequently, more dose reductions were needed in the experimental arm. Patients in the experimental arm received a median cisplatin dose of 250 mg/m2, which was significantly lower than the median dose of 370 mg/m2 in the control arm (P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceThe addition of berzosertib to cisplatin with gemcitabine did not prolong progression-free survival relative to cisplatin with gemcitabine alone in patients with metastatic urothelial cancer, and a trend toward inferior survival was observed with this combination. Berzosertib plus cisplatin with gemcitabine was associated with significantly higher hematologic toxicities despite attenuated dosing of cisplatin with gemcitabine.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02567409.
| S-EPMC8391778 | biostudies-literature