Comparative clinical benefits of systemic adjuvant therapy for paradigm solid tumors.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kirkwood JM
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8555872 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:In treatments of solid tumors, adoptive transfer of ex vivo expanded natural killer (NK) cells has dawned as a new paradigm. Compared with cytotoxic T lymphocytes, NK cells take a unique position targeting tumor cells that evade the host immune surveillance by down-regulating self-antigen presentation. Recent findings highlighted that NK cells can even target cancer stem cells. The efficacy of allogeneic NK cells has been widely investigated in the treatment of hematologic malignancies. In solid tumors, both autologous and allogeneic NK cells have demonstrated potential efficacy. In allogeneic NK cell therapy, the mismatch between the killer cell immunoglobulin-like receptor (KIR) and human leukocyte antigen (HLA) can be harnessed to increase the antitumor activity. However, the allogeneic NK cells cause more adverse events and can be rejected by the host immune system after repeated injections. In this regard, the autologous NK cell therapy is safer. This article reviews the published results of clinical trials and discusses strategies to enhance the efficacy of the NK cell therapy. The difference in immunophenotype of the ex vivo expanded NK cells resulted from different culture methods may affect the final efficacy. Furthermore, currently available standard anticancer therapy, molecularly targeted agents, and checkpoint inhibitors may directly or indirectly enhance the efficacy of NK cell therapy. A recent study discovered that NK cell specific genetic defects are closely associated with the tumor immune microenvironment that determines clinical outcomes. This finding warrants future investigations to find the implication of NK cell specific genetic defects in cancer development and treatment, and NK cell deficiency syndrome should be revisited to enhance our understanding. Overall, it is clear that NK cell therapy is safe and promises a new paradigm for the treatment of solid tumors.
| S-EPMC6826624 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The ability of tumors to evade detection by the immune system via inducing immunosuppression prompted the therapeutic development of immune checkpoint inhibitors. In our recent review, we discussed findings from preclinical and clinical investigations of these agents utilized in combination with radiation inducing abscopal (systemic) antitumor effects.
| S-EPMC4404906 | biostudies-other
Project description:With the recent success of checkpoint inhibitors and other immunomodulating agents, there has been renewed interest in the combination of such agents with radiation. The biologic premise behind such a strategy is that the tumor-antigen release achieved by localized radiation will promote specific tumor targeting by the adaptive immune system, which can be augmented further by systemic immune-stimulating agents. In this manner, clinicians hope to induce a phenomenon known as the abscopal effect, whereby localized radiation results in immune-mediated tumor regression in disease sites well outside of the radiation field. Herein, we present a comprehensive overview of the early clinical and preclinical evidence behind this approach.
| S-EPMC5367158 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The success of chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy in solid tumors, unlike in hematologic malignancies, is limited by inadequate tumor infiltration and T cell dysfunction and exhaustion. Regional delivery of CAR T cells in patients with solid tumors is safe and feasible; promotes infiltration, proliferation, and trafficking; and ignites functionally persisting systemic immunity.
| S-EPMC9197990 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The incidence of brain metastases of solid tumors is increasing. Local treatment of brain metastases is generally straightforward: cranial radiotherapy (e.g., whole-brain radiotherapy or stereotactic radiosurgery) or resection when feasible. However, treatment becomes more complex when brain metastases occur while other metastases, outside of the central nervous system, are being controlled with systemic therapy (chemotherapeutics, molecular targeted agents, or monoclonal antibodies). It is known that some anticancer agents can increase the risk for neurotoxicity when used concurrently with radiotherapy. Increased neurotoxicity decreases quality of life, which is undesirable in this predominantly palliative patient group. Therefore, it is of utmost importance to identify the compounds that should be temporarily discontinued when cranial radiotherapy is needed.This review summarizes the (neuro)toxicity data for combining systemic therapy (chemotherapeutics, molecular targeted agents, or monoclonal antibodies) with concurrent radiotherapy of brain metastases. Because only a limited amount of high-level data has been published, a risk assessment of each agent was done, taking into account the characteristics of each compound (e.g., lipophilicity) and the microenvironment of brain metastasis. The available trials suggest that only gemcitabine, erlotinib, and vemurafenib induce significant neurotoxicity when used concurrently with cranial radiotherapy. We conclude that for most systemic therapies, the currently available literature does not show an increase in neurotoxicity when these therapies are used concurrently with cranial radiotherapy. However, further studies are needed to confirm safety because there is no high-level evidence to permit definitive conclusions. The Oncologist 2017;22:222-235Implications for Practice: The treatment of symptomatic brain metastases diagnosed while patients are receiving systemic therapy continues to pose a dilemma to clinicians. Will concurrent treatment with cranial radiotherapy and systemic therapy (chemotherapeutics, molecular targeted agents, and monoclonal antibodies), used to control intra- and extracranial tumor load, increase the risk for neurotoxicity? This review addresses this clinically relevant question and evaluates the toxicity of combining systemic therapies with cranial radiotherapy, based on currently available literature, in order to determine the need to and interval to interrupt systemic treatment.
| S-EPMC5330699 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEstrogen receptor-positive (ER+) breast cancer is the most diagnosed subtype, with aromatase inhibitors (AIs) being one of the therapeutic drug types used in the clinic. However, endocrine resistance may develop after prolonged treatment, and different approaches, such as combining endocrine and targeted therapies, have been applied. Recently, we demonstrated that cannabidiol (CBD) induces anti-tumor actions in ER+ breast cancer cells by targeting aromatase and ERs. Considering this, we studied, in vitro, whether CBD when combined with AIs could improve their effectiveness.MethodsMCF-7aro cells were used and the effects on cell viability and on the modulation of specific targets were investigated.ResultsCBD when combined with anastrozole (Ana) and letrozole (Let) caused no beneficial effect in comparison to the isolated AIs. In contrast, when combined with the AI exemestane (Exe), CBD potentiated its pro-cell death effects, abolished its estrogen-like effect, impaired ERα activation, and prevented its oncogenic role on the androgen receptor (AR). Moreover, this combination inhibited ERK1/2 activation, promoting apoptosis. The study of the hormonal microenvironment suggests that this combination should not be applied in early stages of ER+ breast tumors.ConclusionsContrary to Ana and Let, this study highlights the potential benefits of combining CBD with Exe to improve breast cancer treatment and opens up the possibility of new therapeutic approaches comprising the use of cannabinoids.
| S-EPMC10177097 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The last two decades of research in the adjuvant setting of pancreas adenocarcinoma have established the value of adjuvant systemic therapy as being able to delay recurrence and increase overall survival. International standards of care in the adjuvant setting include either 6 months of gemcitabine or 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin. The added value of additional agents in the adjuvant setting is being evaluated in several large adjuvant studies. The role of a targeted agent in the adjuvant setting remains investigational. Other major areas of exploration include the integration of adjuvant immunotherapeutic approaches, which provide promise in a setting of micrometastatic disease volumes where such approaches may have greatest value.
| S-EPMC4991774 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Cancer is a systemic heterogeneous disease that can undergo several rounds of latency and activation. Tumor progression evolves by increasing diversity, adaptation to signals from the microenvironment and escape mechanisms from therapy. These dynamic processes indicate necessity for cell plasticity. Epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) plays a major role in facilitating cell plasticity in solid tumors by inducing dedifferentiation and cell type transitions. These two practices, plasticity and dedifferentiation enhance tumor heterogeneity creating a key challenge in cancer treatment. In this review we will explore cancer cell plasticity and elaborate treatment modalities that aspire to overcome such dynamic processes in solid tumors. We will further discuss the therapeutic potential of utilizing enhanced cell plasticity for differentiation therapy.
| S-EPMC9410762 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy is an innovative form of immunotherapy wherein autologous T cells are genetically modified to express chimeric receptors encoding an antigen-specific single-chain variable fragment and various costimulatory molecules. Upon administration, these modified T cells traffic to, and recognize, cancer cells in an HLA-independent manner. CAR T-cell therapy has shown remarkable success in the treatment of CD-19-expressing B-cell acute lymphocytic leukemia. However, clinical gains to the same magnitude have not been reported in solid tumors. Several known obstacles to CAR T-cell therapy for solid tumors include target antigen identification, effective trafficking to the tumor, robust activation, proliferation, and in vivo cytotoxicity. Beyond these T-cell intrinsic properties, a complex and dynamic immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment in solid tumors hinders T-cell efficacy. Notable advancements in CAR design to include multiple costimulatory molecules, ligands, and soluble cytokines have shown promise in preclinical models, and some of these are currently in early-phase clinical trials. In this review, we discuss selected solid tumor malignancies and relevant preclinical data and highlight clinical trial results that are available. Furthermore, we outline some obstacles to CAR T-cell therapy for each tumor and propose strategies to overcome some of these limitations.
| S-EPMC5549627 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The benefits of breast cancer adjuvant systemic treatments are generally assumed to be proportional (or constant) over time, but limited data suggest that some treatment effects may vary with time. We therefore systematically assessed the proportional hazards assumption across all 19 breast cancer adjuvant systemic therapy trials in the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) database. The NSABP breast cancer trials were tested for the proportionality of hazard rates between randomized treatment groups for five endpoints: overall survival, disease-free survival and recurrence, local-regional recurrence, or distant recurrence as first events. When the proportional hazards assumption did not hold, a "change point for the relative risk" technique was used to identify the temporal breakdown of the treatment effect. Time-varying treatment effects were observed in nearly half of the trials (nine of 19). In six (B-05, B-11, B-12, B-14, B-16, and B-20), novel treatment benefits diminished statistically significantly at specific time points following surgery. In B-09 and B-31, novel treatment benefits were delayed and emerged more than one year after surgery (1.57 and 1.32 years correspondingly), but the benefit in B-09 reversed after the third year of follow-up. In one trial (B-23), the initial advantage and subsequent disadvantage of one of the regimens was evident. Breast cancer adjuvant systemic therapy can have statistically significant time-varying effects, which should be considered in the design, analysis, reporting, and translation of clinical trials. These time-dependent effects will have greater relevance as the number of long-term breast cancer survivors increases.
| S-EPMC4635647 | biostudies-literature