Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Disease Biology, Small Molecules in Development of Therapeutic Drugs’ Category

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

Cancer Diagnostics by Genomic Sequencing: ‘No’ to Sequencing Patient’s DNA, ‘No’ to Sequencing Patient’s Tumor, ‘Yes’ to focus on Gene Mutation Aberration & Analysis of Gene Abnormalities

How to Tailor Cancer Therapy to the particular Genetics of a patient’s Cancer

THIS IS A SERIES OF FOUR POINTS OF VIEW IN SUPPORT OF the Paradigm Shift in Human Genomics

‘No’ to Sequencing Patient’s DNA, ‘No’ to Sequencing Patient’s Tumor, ‘Yes’ to focus on Gene Mutation Aberration & Analysis of Gene Abnormalities

PRESENTED in the following FOUR PARTS. Recommended to be read in its entirety for completeness and arrival to the End Point of Present and Future Frontier of Research in Genomics

Part 1:

Research Paradigm Shift in Human Genomics – Predictive Biomarkers and Personalized Medicine

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/13/paradigm-shift-in-human-genomics-predictive-biomarkers-and-personalized-medicine-part-1/

Part 2:

LEADERS in the Competitive Space of Genome Sequencing of Genetic Mutations for Therapeutic Drug Selection in Cancer Personalized Treatment

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/13/leaders-in-genome-sequencing-of-genetic-mutations-for-therapeutic-drug-selection-in-cancer-personalized-treatment-part-2/

Part 3:

Personalized Medicine: An Institute Profile – Coriell Institute for Medical Research

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/13/personalized-medicine-an-institute-profile-coriell-institute-for-medical-research-part-3/

Part 4:

The Consumer Market for Personal DNA Sequencing

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/13/consumer-market-for-personal-dna-sequencing-part-4/

 

Part 3:

Personalized Medicine: Institute Profile – Coriell Institute for Medical Research

Coriell Institute for Medical Research, founded in 1953 and based in Camden, New Jersey, is an independent non-profit research center dedicated to the study of the human genome. Expert staff and pioneering programs in the fields of personalized medicine, cell biology, cytogenetics, genotyping, and biobanking drive our mission.

The emerging field of personalized medicine draws upon a person’s genomic information to tailor treatments and prescription drug dosing to optimize health outcomes. The Coriell Personalized Medicine Collaborative® (CPMC®) research study is seeking to understand the usefulness of genetic risk and pharmacogenomics in clinical decision-making and healthcare management.

Coriell has a distinguished history in cell biology. We are building upon this expertise by playing an important role in induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cell research. Induced pluripotent stem cells are powerful cells which can be made from skin or blood cells, and they are revolutionizing the way human disease is studied and how drugs are developed. Skin cells from a patient diagnosed with heart disease are being genetically reprogrammed into stem cells, and then transformed into beating cardiac cells. Researchers can now examine the heart-diseased cells to better understand the progression of heart disease and develop treatments and cures. Drug efficacy and safety can also be tested in this laboratory environment, providing an efficient model of drug discovery that delivers drugs to patients sooner. This technology, called “disease in a dish,” offers researchers the potential to study the myriad of human diseases, including Alzheimer’s disease, muscular dystrophy, and diabetes.

In addition to pioneering cutting-edge research initiatives, Coriell offers custom research services – including cell culture, cytogenetic analyses, and molecular biology – to the scientific community. Furthermore, Coriell’s Genotyping and Microarray Center is one of the nation’s largest centers, with high-throughput DNA analysis, CLIA-certified genotyping platforms systems from Illumina and Affymetrix.

Essential to the Institute’s support of international scientific research is the Coriell Biobank. From this renowned cell bank, we manage and distribute the world’s most diverse collection of cell lines, DNA, and other biological resources. The Coriell Biobank provided support to the Human Genome Project, a worldwide program to map the entire human genome, and to the International HapMap Project, a project providing an efficient tool to identify disease-causing genes.

The Coriell Cell Repositories provide essential research reagents to the scientific community by establishing, verifying, maintaining, and distributing cell cultures and DNA derived from cell cultures. These collections, supported by funds from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and several foundations, are extensively utilized by research scientists around the world.

The Business Aspects of the Institute

  • Personalized Medicine

DNA, Genes, and SNPs

What is the CPMC Study?

CPMC Technology

CPMC FAQs

CPMC Advisors and Partners

Stem Cells

Induced Pluripotent Stem (iPS) Cells

iPS Cell Research at Coriell

Biobank Catalog

Working with Coriell

  • Research Services

Overview

Biobanking

Cell Culture

Cytogenetics

Genotyping & Microarray

Molecular Biology

Research Design & Expertise

Stem Cells

Quality at Coriell

  • BioBanking

Overview

What is a Biobank?

How Coriell Banks Cells

Biobank Technology

Biobank Catalog

Working with Coriell

http://www.coriell.org/

http://www.coriell.org/assets/pdfs/discover-winter2012.pdf

http://www.ccr.coriell.org/

http://www.coriell.org/about/coriell-faqs

 

What is the Coriell Institute of Medical Research?

Founded in 1953, Coriell Institute for Medical Research is an independent, non-profit research organization dedicated to the study of the human genome and to supporting national and international research by providing biomaterials from its renowned biobank.

How did the Coriell Institute start?

Lewis L. Coriell, MD, PhD, a virology researcher and pediatrician, recognized the need for scientific research that would translate into better patient care. After seeing how his research helped to bring the Salk vaccine to polio patients across our nation, Dr. Coriell founded the South Jersey Medical Research Foundation. It was renamed the Institute for Medical Research in 1966 to recognize its broader reach, and, in 1985, to honor Dr. Coriell’s retirement, his name was added. For a look at our history, visit our timeline.

http://www.coriell.org/about/our-history

About the Founder

“You set up an experiment to test the theory, and most of the time it’s not the way you thought it would be. But that’s the way you learn. You go from hypothesis to hypothesis. And it’s exciting because that’s the way we learn to treat, to diagnose, and to prevent illness.”

Lewis L. Coriell, MD, PhD
Virologist and Pediatrician
June 19, 1911 – June 19, 2001

Lewis L. Coriell was born in the farming community of Sciotoville, in southern Ohio. While he was still a young child, his family moved to Montana toward more promising agricultural opportunities. It has been written that “the aspects of character, personality, temperament, and intellect that marked Dr. Coriell’s exceptional professional life… can easily be traced to his Montana upbringing.”i

Education and Early Career

Beginning his academic journey at the University of Montana, Lewis Coriell completed undergraduate studies in biology and subsequently earned a master’s degree in bacteriology and immunology in 1936. That same year, he married fellow student Ester Lentz; they would remain by each other’s side for the next 60 years. The newlyweds moved to the University of Kansas so he could pursue doctoral studies in immunology. While there, Dr. Coriell published his first article on an aspect of science he would revolutionize: The storage of cells by freezing them. Lewis Coriell earned his doctorate in 1940 and was awarded his medical degree in 1942. The young researcher was drawn to the field of virology – the study of viruses as they evolve and infect. At this time, bacterial infections presented themselves most often in children. This combination led Dr. Coriell to seek out a residency in pediatrics. As none were immediately available, he chose a cardiology residency at Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit. MI. As it happens, the Coriells’ time in Detroit was brief.

By 1943, World War II was raging and Dr. Coriell was called to service with the United States Army Medical Command’s Biological Research Division at Fort Detrick, MD. It was here that his research in cell cultivation began. After the war, Dr. Coriell began his ideal pediatric residency under Dr. Joseph Stokes, Jr., physician-in-chief at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP).  To his delight, Dr. Stokes placed great emphasis on research and was instrumental in attracting federal funds to research childhood disease at his institution.  The ability to translate research into patient care inspired Dr. Coriell.  He saw how research was essential to the treatment of his patients suffering the devastating effects of viruses like small pox, mumps, and polio.

Adventures in Cell Culture

By the time Dr. Coriell arrived in Philadelphia, virologists knew they had to grow viruses in cell culture to prepare purified viruses for the manufacture of vaccines. However, contamination was rife in the laboratory and proving to be a major obstacle. At CHOP, along with his colleagues, Dr. Coriell perfected the technique to culture human tissue in a sterile host that does not produce its own antibodies. The ability to sustain living human cells in culture, and keep them from being contaminated, led to a key breakthrough in polio research – it enabled scientists to grow the polio virus and work toward the first vaccine.

Moving to Camden and Taking on Polio

By the early 1950’s, an acute infectious disease called polio was spreading from person to person very quickly across the United States, striking fear into citizens, costing children their lives and crippling those who survived. In 1949, Dr. Coriell arrived in Camden, NJ, as medical director of Camden Municipal Hospital, one of the country’s last infectious disease hospitals and home to the majority of the region’s polio patients. In 1951, Dr. Coriell was appointed field director of the Polio Prevention Study and directed the successful gamma globulin field trials.

By 1954, the Salk polio vaccine could be made in large quantities and was ready for human clinical trials. Based on his success shepherding the gamma globulin field trials, Dr. Coriell was chosen by the National Poliomyelitis Foundation to evaluate the Salk polio virus vaccine clinical trials in New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Virginia. The success of the evaluation program led to the release of the Salk vaccine on the national level. Before the trials began in 1955, approximately 20,000 new polio cases were being reported each year. By 1960, cases were reduced to 3,000 per year. By 1979, that number was just 10 each year. Recognizing his contribution, Dr. Coriell received the 1957 International Poliomyelitis Congress Presidential Medal. Soon after, he became chairman of the Committee on the Control of Infectious Diseases of the American Academy of Pediatrics which formulated the vaccination procedures for all children in this critical period.

In 1953, Dr. Coriell initiated a campaign to build the first non-profit academic medical research institute in South Jersey. Under his guidance, the Institute for Medical Research began research in cancer, human cytogenetics, infectious diseases, and methods to improve cell culture techniques. The history of the Institute’s accomplishments included Dr. Coriell’s foresight in calling for the establishment of a central tissue culture bank and cell registry to certify and maintain cell cultures. It began with a partnership with the National Institutes of Health to create the first standardized cell repository. Today, the Institute is home to the world’s most diverse collection of cell lines and DNA samples available to researchers.

Working with his colleague, Dr. Gary McGarrity, Dr. Coriell applied infection control technology – specifically laminar flow – to create the laminar flow hood that is vital to infection control in laboratories, operating rooms, and hospital rooms around the world.

Dr. Coriell’s pioneering techniques for characterizing, freezing, and storing non-contaminated cell cultures in liquid nitrogen constitute one of the greatest contributions to modern human genetics.

Retirement

Dr. Coriell retired in 1985. To honor the occasion, the institute he founded was renamed the Coriell Institute for Medical Research. He remained involved in several ways, as a member of the board and often speaking with groups about the Institute’s history. Following his retirement, Dr. Coriell was elected president of the prestigious College of Physicians of Philadelphia, the oldest medical society in America. Dr. Coriell is the only New Jersey physician to receive this honor.

Dr. Coriell, a pioneering researcher and physician, died on June 19, 2001, in Southern New Jersey. It was his 90th birthday.

A Legacy in Science

Dr. Coriell’s accomplishments in science are indeed many. Perhaps Dr. Coriell’s most enduring legacy was his generosity in knowledge and his ability to bring scientists together to explore research questions and collaborate on solutions. Several important names in science were drawn to join or spend time at the Institute; they included Warren W. Nichols, Ray Dutcher, Richard Mulivor, Etienne Lasfargues, Jesse Charney, Arthur Greene, Daniel Moore, and collaboration with Drs. Albert Levan and Joe Hin Tijo, who first discovered that humans have 46 chromosomes.

Dr. Coriell also created an institute that is a well-respected resident of the Greater Philadelphia region and known as a leader in research worldwide.

Coriell Today

Dr. Coriell’s vision is now our vision. Today, Coriell staff and scientists collaborate on scientific ideas and programs to improve human health.

The Coriell Personalized Medicine Collaborative® research study is studying the utility of using your genetic information to tailor treatments and medications for you. And building on Dr. Coriell’s innovations in cell biology, we are playing an important role in cutting-edge stem cell research to unlock the code of human disease, including Parkinson’s and heart disease. Coriell offers a range of custom research services that have long supported national and international science. In the field of biobanking, Coriell supports research all over the world from its renowned and diverse cell collections.

Our innovation today is a testament to Dr. Coriell’s pioneering past. More importantly, our innovation is a commitment to your future.

i O’Donnell, John. Coriell; The Coriell Institute for Medical Research and a Half Century of Science. Massachusetts: SHP, 2002.

Where is the Coriell Institute located?

Coriell is located at 403 Haddon Avenue, Camden, NJ 08103. For directions, click here
We recommend that you park at 3 Cooper Plaza, a parking garage associated with the hospital, located directly across the street from Coriell. There is also a second hospital parking lot located on Benson Street, which is a block from the Institute.

For what is the Coriell Institute known?

Coriell Institute is a leader in the emerging field of personalized medicine – often called genome-informed medicine – which is the practice of using genetic information to better understand a patient’s risk for disease and response to medications. The Coriell Personalized Medicine Collaborative is a research study designed to study the utility of genetic information in clinical decision-making and patient care.

Coriell is also playing an important role in exploring the promise of induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cell  biotechnologies. [Pluripotent refers to how cells can grow into many different types of cells.] We can take skin cells and reprogram them – essentially turn back time – to behave like a stem cell. These cells can then be triggered, using specific proteins, to become cardiac cells, neurons (brain cells), or insulin-producing pancreatic cells, amongst others. Over the years, Coriell has developed an extraordinary expertise in the culture of human cells, and much of the standard practices in cell culture were developed at Coriell. This includes the techniques for freezing and thawing cells, and sterile handling of cultures. As a result of our cell biology expertise, scientists from every major research center in the world draw upon the Coriell Cell Repositories, maintained in the world’s leading biobank, which contains cell lines and DNA representing approximately 650 diseases.

Who is on the Coriell Institute staff?

Coriell is home to approximately 120 scientific and operational staff. Michael Christman, PhD, is Coriell’s President and CEO; he is an expert in genomics and genetics.  Joseph L. Mintzer is Coriell’s Executive Vice President and COO and manages the fiscal and operational aspect of the institute. Meet the rest of the Coriell leadership team here.

Who is on the Coriell Institute Board of Trustees?

Coriell is guided by a diverse Board of Trustees that includes corporate, medical, financial, and philanthropic leaders. Chairman of the Coriell Board is Robert P. Kiep III. Learn more about the Coriell Board of Trustees here.

How is Coriell Institute funded?

Coriell Institute has an annual operating budget of $17 million, about $11 million of which comes from federally- and state-funded grants and contracts. Private and corporate philanthropy provides the seed money to initiate new programs in science at Coriell – science that has the opportunity to advance discoveries in research which may not be occurring at other research institutes.

How can I support the research mission of Coriell Institute?

While the majority of Coriell’s operating revenue is derived from federally- and state-funded grants and contracts, the Institute also relies on private, foundation, and corporate philanthropy. Your support can advance the emerging field of personalized medicine to improve the practice of medicine. Your support also allows Coriell to pursue and support research in adult stem cell biology and genomics seeking to unlock the code of human disease. 
There are many ways to give to Coriell: Outrights gifts, through your workplace giving programs, planned giving, volunteering your time and expertise, or attending or hosting a Coriell event. Visit our fund development page to learn more about how you can support scientific research.

How does Coriell Institute support international research?

The Coriell Cell Repositories offers essential research materials to the scientific community by establishing, verifying, maintaining, and distributing cell cultures and DNA. Since the first NIH-sponsored repository was established in 1964 – Coriell has distributed hundreds of thousands of cell lines and DNA samples to researchers in 64 countries. More than 7,000 peer-reviewed papers have been published citing almost 12,000 Coriell Repository samples.

What research services does Coriell Institute provide? 
Coriell offers several best-in-class custom research services.

Coriell’s Genotyping and Microarray Center – one of the nation’s largest centers and CLIA-certified in 48 states – is a high-capacity facility with high-throughput systems from Affymetrix and Illumina.

The Coriell Institute Cytogenetics Laboratory is a state-of-the-art facility that combines conventional and molecular cytogenetic analyses with copy number and loss of heterozygosity (LOH) analyses by microarray. The laboratory is equipped with a network of five Applied Spectral Imaging work-stations that are used to perform G-banded karyotyping, and Fluorescent In Situ Hybridization (FISH).

Coriell also offers many preparative and diagnostic nucleic acid and molecular biology services, all subject to extensive quality controls.

And, the Coriell biobank is regarded as the most diverse collection of cell lines and DNA available to the international research community.

Does Coriell Institute engage in gene therapy or stem cell clinical trials?

Coriell Institute does not pursue research using human embryonic stem cells, nor do we conduct clinical trials on stem cell technologies. If you are interested in gene therapy or stem cell-related clinical trials, please visit http://www.clinicaltrials.gov.

What education does Coriell offer?

Coriell offers a course in cell culture: Advanced biology coupled with the history, theory, and techniques of maintaining live cells in long-term culture is offered to students.

Coriell also invites a limited number of motivated students into the Institute to participate in a Summer Experience program to gain insight into the workings of an independent research institute

How can I stay informed on what is happening at Coriell Institute?

Sign up for our email updates and you’ll receive periodic research news, notable donations, and upcoming events. Visit our Media Center regularly to read the latest news articles and Coriell press releases.

How can I get a quick overview of Coriell Institute?

Read our Coriell Fast Facts for a basic introduction to the Institute. For more information, explore the About section of our website.

Are Coriell Institute scientists and staff available for speaking engagements?

As their schedules permit, Coriell’s scientific and operational staffs enjoy the opportunity to highlight the work occurring at Coriell. Many hold joint faculty appointments at our region’s universities and teach an array of topics from business management and healthcare policy to the science of cell culture and stem cell research.

Coriell also participates in several outreach programs each year, including science festivals and conferences. We also host tours of our laboratories for business and governmental leaders and middle school and high school students.

16. Is Coriell Institute affiliated with Cooper Medical School of Rowan University?
Yes; Coriell is looking forward to welcoming the new medical school and will be integral in teaching genetics and genomics to the next generation of healthcare providers.

Fig3a-200

The Power of Stem Cell Science

The promise of stem cell research lays in its application in understanding the progression of human disease, the ability to cure disease and reverse injury, and to better target therapies to optimize our health outcomes. Induced pluripotent stem (iPS) cell technology has the ability to revolutionize the way human disease is studied. Creating iPS cell lines from various rare and common disease states, as well as from various populations, will open the doors for pre-clinical research studies.

Fig3b-200

Let Our Expertise Make Your Research a Success

Coriell offers a range of custom research services that have long supported national and international science. Whether you are requesting a cell line for your research studies or submitting DNA samples for genotyping analysis, Coriell is committed to providing you with flexible, innovative, and results-oriented research services. Our laboratories are built to foster scientific collaboration, and your research will benefit from this collaborative environment.

Coriell’s Biobank and Cell Culture Laboratory have established the gold standard in the cryopreservation of biomaterials and the capacity to support varied research worldwide. The diverse collections of biological specimens managed by Coriell offer the scientific community the highest quality specimens, which are necessary for successful research endeavors. Since the first repository – a National Institutes of Health collection – was established at Coriell in 1964, hundreds of thousands of cell lines and DNA samples have been distributed to researchers in 64 countries; more than 7,000 peer-reviewed papers have been published citing almost 12,000 biospecimens from the Coriell Biobank.

Fig3c-200

Making Medicine Personalized for You

Our health is determined by many factors: the genetics we inherit; our innate personal traits of race, age and gender; our individual behavior; our family and community networks; and at the macro level, our economic, cultural, and environmental conditions. These factors are different for every person and will change over their lifespan. So too is a person’s experience with disease and how they respond to drugs or other medical interventions. Personalized medicine intends to make medical treatment as individual as the biology of one’s disease.

Personalized medicine has the potential to offer patients and their doctors several advantages, including:

The ability to make better informed clinical decisions.

A higher probability of desired health outcomes by using better-targeted therapies.

The reduced probability of adverse reactions from medications and treatments.

A focus on prevention and prediction of disease, rather than reaction to it.

Earlier disease intervention.

Reduced healthcare costs.

Fig3d-200

Preserving cells today for research tomorrow

Dr. Lewis Coriell’s pioneering techniques for characterizing, freezing, and storing cell cultures in liquid nitrogen constitute one of the greatest contributions to modern human research. Today, the Coriell Biobank is regarded as the most diverse collection of cell lines and DNA available to the international research community. In addition to these high-quality biospecimens, Coriell also maintains tissue, plasma, serum, urine, and cerebrospinal fluid.

Few organizations have the history of innovations in repository science that have been developed and implemented at Coriell. For nearly 60 years, Coriell has set the standard in biobanking services, including the experimental design, collection, processing, distribution, cryogenic preservation, and information management of human biomaterials used in research. By developing and maintaining biorepositories as national and international resources for the study of human diseases, aging, and neurological disease, Coriell is committed to providing the scientific community with well-characterized, cell cultures and DNA preparations, annotated with rich phenotypic data.

Catalog Collections

NIGMS Human Genetic Repository 
The Human Genetic Cell Repository, sponsored by the National Institute of General Medical Sciences, provides scientists around the world with resources for cell and genetic research. The samples include highly characterized cell lines and high quality DNA. Repository samples represent a variety of disease states, chromosomal abnormalities, apparently healthy individuals and many distinct human populations.

NINDS Human Genetics DNA and Cell Line Repository 
The National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke is committed to gene discovery, as a strategy for identifying the genetic causes and correlates of nervous system disorders. The NINDS Human Genetics DNA and Cell Line Repository banks samples from subjects with cerebrovascular disease, epilepsy, motor neuron disease, Parkinsonism, and Tourette Syndrome, as well as controls.

NIA Aging Cell Repository 
Sponsored by the National Institute on Aging (NIA), the AGING CELL REPOSITORY, is a resource facilitating cellular and molecular research studies on the mechanisms of aging and the degenerative processes associated with it. The cells in this resource have been collected over the past three decades using strict diagnostic criteria and banked under the highest quality standards of cell culture. Scientists use the highly-characterized, viable, and contaminant-free cell cultures from this collection for research on such diseases as Alzheimer disease, progeria, Parkinsonism, Werner syndrome, and Cockayne syndrome.

NHGRI Sample Repository for Human Genetic Research 
The National Human Genome Research Institute (NHGRI) led the National Institutes of Health’s (NIH) contribution to the International Human Genome Project, which had as its primary goal the sequencing of the human genome. This project was successfully completed in April 2003. Now, the NHGRI’s mission has expanded to encompass a broad range of studies aimed at understanding the structure and function of the human genome and its role in health and disease.

American Diabetes Association, GENNID Study 
The purpose of the American Diabetes Association (ADA), GENNID Study (Genetics of non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus, NIDDM) is to establish a national database and cell repository consisting of information and genetic material from families with well-documented NIDDM. The GENNID Study will provide investigators with the information and samples necessary to conduct genetic linkage studies and locate the genes for NIDDM.

The Autism Research Resource 
The State of New Jersey funded the initiation of a genetic resource to support the study of autism in families where more than one child is affected or where one child is affected and one demonstrates another significant and related developmental disorder. This resource now receives continuing support from the Coriell Institute for Medical Research. An open bank of anonymously collected materials documented by a detailed clinical diagnosis forms the basis of this growing database of information about the disease.

IPBIR Repository 
The purpose of the IPBIR – Integrated Primate Biomaterials and Information Resource is to assemble, characterize, and distribute high-quality DNA samples of known provenance with accompanying demographic, geographic, and behavioral information in order to stimulate and facilitate research in primate genetic diversity and evolution, comparative genomics, and population genetics.

HD Community BioRepository 
HD Community BioRepository is a secure, centralized repository that stores and distributes quality-controlled, reliable research reagents. Huntingtin DNAs are now available and antibodies, antigenic peptides, cell lines, and hybridomas will be added soon.

USIDNET Repository 
The USIDNET DNA and Cell Repository has been established as part of an NIH-funded program – the US Immunodeficiency Network (www.usidnet.org) – to provide a resource of DNA and functional lymphoid cells obtained from patients with various primary immunodeficiency diseases. These uncommon disorders include patients with defects in T cell, B cell and/or granulocyte function as well as patients with abnormalities in antibodies/immunoglobulins, complement and other host defense mechanisms.

CDC Cell and DNA Repository 
The Genetic Testing Reference Material Coordination Program of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Coriell Institute for Medical Research announce the availability of samples derived from transformed cell lines for use in molecular genetic testing. The DNA samples prepared from these reference cell lines are available through the Coriell Cell Repositories. Diseases include cystic fibrosis (CF), 5′ 10′ methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase deficiency (MTHFR), HFE-associated hereditary hemochromatosis, Huntington disease (HD), fragile X syndrome, Muenke syndrome, connexin 26-associated deafness, and alpha-thalassemia.

Leiomyosarcoma Cell and DNA Repository 
The Leiomyosarcoma Cell and DNA Repository has been established with an award from the National Leiomyosarcoma Foundation. This foundation provides leadership in supporting research of Leiomyosarcoma, improving treatment outcomes of those affected by this disease as well as fostering awareness in the medical community and general public.

COHORT Project 
The Cooperative Huntington’s Observational Trial Repository has been established as a resource for the discovery of information related to Huntington’s disease and its causes, progressioin, treatments, and possible cures. This is a growing bank for DATA and SPECIMENS to accelerate research on Huntington’s disease.

YERKES Repository 
The Yerkes National Primate Research Center of Emory University is an international leader in biomedical and behavioral research. For more than seven decades, the Yerkes Research Center has been dedicated to advancing scientific understanding of primate biology, behavior, veterinary care and conservation, and to improving human health and well-being.

NEI-AREDS Genetic Repository 
The Age-Related Eye Disease Study was designed to learn about macular degeneration and cataract, two leading causes of vision loss in older adults. The study looked at how these two diseases progress and what their causes may be. In addition, the study tested certain vitamins and minerals to find out if they can help to prevent or slow these diseases. Participants in the study did not have to have either disease. (Enrollment was completed in January 1998.) Eleven medical centers in the United States took part in the study, and more than 4,700 people across the country were enrolled in AREDS. The study was supported by the National Eye Institute, part of the Federal government’s National Institutes of Health. The clinical trial portion of the study also received support from Bausch & Lomb Pharmaceuticals and was completed in October 2001. Learn about the results of the clinical trial on the National Eye Institute’s website: http://www.nei.nih.gov/amd/.

The Wistar Institute 
The Wistar Institute collection at Coriell contains cell lines that have been developed by Wistar scientists. These materials are offered for non-commercial research conducted by universities, government agencies and academic research centers. The Wistar Institute collection currently contains a group of hybridomas that produce monoclonal antibodies that are useful in influenza research and vaccine development. Melanoma cell lines, derived from patients with a wide range of disease ranging from mild dysplasia to advanced metastatic cancer, will be added shortly. More information on The Wistar Institute, its research and scientists can be found at www.wistar.org.

J. Craig Venter Institute Human Reference Genome (HuRef) 
The Human Reference Genetic Material Repository makes available DNA from a single individual, J. Craig Venter, whose genome has been sequenced and assembled. The DNA samples are prepared from a lymphoblastoid cell line established at Coriell Cell Repositories from a sample of peripheral blood. The DNA samples are available in 50 microgram aliquots. The lymphoblastoid cell line is not available for distribution..

Read Full Post »

LEADERS in Genome Sequencing of Genetic Mutations for Therapeutic Drug Selection in Cancer Personalized Treatment: Part 2

Curator:  Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

 

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is ArticleID-17-2.png

WordCloud Image Produced by Adam Tubman

 

Cancer Diagnostics by Genomic Sequencing: ‘No’ to Sequencing Patient’s DNA, ‘No’ to Sequencing Patient’s Tumor, ‘Yes’ to focus on Gene Mutation Aberration & Analysis of Gene Abnormalities

How to Tailor Cancer Therapy to the particular Genetics of a patient’s Cancer

THIS IS A SERIES OF FOUR POINTS OF VIEW IN SUPPORT OF the Paradigm Shift in Human Genomics

‘No’ to Sequencing Patient’s DNA, ‘No’ to Sequencing Patient’s Tumor, ‘Yes’ to focus on Gene Mutation Aberration & Analysis of Gene Abnormalities

PRESENTED in the following FOUR PARTS. Recommended to be read in its entirety for completeness and arrival to the End Point of Present and Future Frontier of Research in Genomics

Part 1:

Research Paradigm Shift in Human Genomics – Predictive Biomarkers and Personalized Medicine

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/13/paradigm-shift-in-human-genomics-predictive-biomarkers-and-personalized-medicine-part-1/

Part 2:

LEADERS in the Competitive Space of Genome Sequencing of Genetic Mutations for Therapeutic Drug Selection in Cancer Personalized Treatment

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/13/leaders-in-genome-sequencing-of-genetic-mutations-for-therapeutic-drug-selection-in-cancer-personalized-treatment-part-2/

Part 3:

Personalized Medicine: An Institute Profile – Coriell Institute for Medical Research

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/13/personalized-medicine-an-institute-profile-coriell-institute-for-medical-research-part-3/

Part 4:

The Consumer Market for Personal DNA Sequencing

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/13/consumer-market-for-personal-dna-sequencing-part-4/

 

 

Part 2:

LEADERS in the Competitive Space of Genome Sequencing of Genetic Mutations for Therapeutic Drug Selection in Cancer Personalized Treatment

 

  • Foundation Medicine, a Cambridge, Mass.-based company that sells a $5,800 diagnostic test that uses DNA sequencing to help doctors guess which cancer drugs would be helpful in fighting a particular patient’s tumor.

CAMBRIDGE, Mass., January 8, 2013 – Foundation Medicine, Inc. today announced an expansion of its Series B financing, raising an additional $13.5 million and bringing the total raised in the round to $56 million. The new investors include Bill Gates, Evan Jones and Yuri Milner.

“Advances in understanding the human genome are having a dramatic impact on almost every area of medicine,” said Bill Gates. “Foundation Medicine’s approach in harnessing the power of genomic data to improve care for cancer patients could represent an extremely important step forward in improving routine cancer care. I’m happy to be supporting this quite promising approach.”

http://www.foundationmedicine.com/pdf/news-releases/2013_01_08_FMI_Series_B_Ext_FINAL.pdf

Foundation, which previously listed Kleiner Perkins Caulfield & Byers and Google Ventures, raised $13.5 million in the series B round in which Gates participated, bringing its total take to $56 million. The other investors were Facebook billionaire Yuri Milner, who also recently invested in the personal genomics company 23andMe, and Evan Jones, the diagnostics industry legend who founded DiGene, which was sold to Qiagen for $1.6 billion in 2007. Jones will also join Foundation’s board.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2013/01/08/bill-gates-invests-in-cancer-dna-sequencing-firm/

It now costs as little as $1,000 to get a fairly accurate readout of the 6 billion letters of DNA code for any single person.

In cancer, the approach right now is usually not to sequence all a patient’s DNA or that of his tumor, but instead to focus on particular genetic mutations in the tumor that might provide clues as to what medicines to try. Major cancer centers are using this approach with patients for whom it’s not obvious which medicine represents the best bet. Foundation’s approach has been to provide that kind of testing to a larger audience. To do so, it uses the DNA sequencing machines made by Illumina and other companies.

“What we want to do is take this testing to the community practices to treat patients where they live,” Michael Pellini, Foundation’s chief executive, 2011.

There is some evidence backing up that test. In a study conducted with the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and published in Nature Medicine, found that more than half of patients with lung and colon cancer might benefit from the test.  from high-speed tests that detect DNA flaws doctors can target with existing medicines, a study found.

Researchers used a gene test made by closely held Foundation Medicine Inc. to sequence 145 cancer-associated genes in 40 colon tumor samples and 24 lung tumors.

They found that

53 percent of colon tumors and

71 percent of lung tumors

had mutations that may be attacked with cancer medicines on the market or in human trials, according to the study published in Nature Medicine. In some cases, the results revealed what drugs wouldn’t work against the tumors.

The study from researchers at Foundation Medicine and the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston, shows the value of using DNA sequencing machines to optimize treatment by matching drugs against specific gene abnormalities inside a patient’s tumor, said Pasi Janne, a study co-author.

Finding Gene Abnormalities

Maureen Cronin, a study co-author and molecular pharmacologist at Cambridge, Massachusetts-based Foundation Medicine, said her company was finding new gene abnormalities at a much higher rate than they expected as it performs DNA scans on tumors.

“We expected to find new things, but not at the frequency we are finding them,” she said in a telephone interview. The results “are very surprising.

The study also suggests cancer researchers may need to rethink the way they classify and treat the disease, Cronin said. The particular genetic abnormality inside tumor DNA may matter as much as what organ the tumor came from, she said.

Pfizer is aware of the new lung cancer gene finding and “believes the data are interesting,” said Jenifer Antonacci, a company spokeswoman, in an e-mail.

Laura Woodin, a spokeswoman for London-based AstraZeneca, said the company “is constantly alert to new developments and research in the science of oncology and we review relevant, peer reviewed studies for what they might mean for patients and drug development.”

Foundation Medicine performs a $5,800 test that takes tumor samples and sequences DNA from 200 genes relevant to cancer. It is funded with $33.5 million in venture capital from Third Rock Ventures, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers and Google Ventures, according to its website. $56 Millions on January 8, 2013.

It is difficult to analyze DNA data, Foundation’s test is anything but a full genome, it’s a $6,000 .02% of the genome, showing how much of the problem of using genetic information will need to coming from solving computational and analytical problems — exactly the kind of thing that Bill Gates has always been interested in both at Microsoft and in his work getting lifesaving vaccines to children all around the world.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-12/high-speed-dna-scans-help-most-lung-cancer-patients-study-finds.html

Physicians need to incorporate the latest molecular diagnostic tests to help guide treatment of cancer patients due to the growing number of molecular subtypes that are understood across tumor types.

As more targeted therapies are approved for new molecular subtypes, the number of tests that need to be performed on each patient to determine their subtype increases and very quickly exhausts the very small amount of tumor tissue that is available in routine, clinical samples

Importantly, as patients’ molecular subtypes are more broadly incorporated into physician treatment decisions, we continue to further our understanding of a pathway view of cancer. Patients with different tumor types can have same molecular subtype – often, these therapies are applicable across tumor types since they are targeting the same pathway.

Comprehensive cancer genome analysis to routine cancer care. The company’s initial clinical assay, FoundationOneTM, is a fully informative genomic profile to identify a patient’s individual molecular alterations and match them with relevant targeted therapies and clinical trials.

http://www.foundationmedicine.com/diagnostics.php

The DNA sequencing field has drawn increased interest from pharmaceutical makers focused on developing gene-targeted therapies. Roche Holding AG (ROG), the world’s biggest maker of cancer medicines, last month began a $5.7 billion hostile takeover offer for Illumina Inc., the maker of gene sequencing machines that Foundation Medicine uses in its tests.

  • Pfizer’s Sutent

The researchers also spotted a previously unknown genetic flaw in 2 percent of 561 lung tumors tested. The flaw activates a growth-boosting protein targeted by Pfizer Inc. (PFE)’s kidney- cancer drug Sutent, hinting that the treatment from the New York-based drugmaker may also work in these lung patients, said Janne. He wants to begin a trial of Sutent in lung-cancer patients with the gene change by year end, he said.

Lev-Ari, A. (2012N). Sunitinib (Sutent) brings Adult acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) to Remission – RNA Sequencing – FLT3 Receptor Blockade

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/07/09/sunitinib-brings-adult-all-to-remission-rna-sequencing/

Pfizer’s Kidney Cancer Drug Sutent Effectively caused REMISSION to Adult Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL)

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/07/10/pfizers-kidney-cancer-drug-sutent-effectively-caused-remission-to-adult-acute-lymphoblastic-leukemia-all/REMISSION to Adult Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL)

REMISSION to Adult Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL): Pfizer’s Sutent blocks FLT3 Gene Receptors

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/?s=Pfizer

Researchers in Japan also reported finding the same new genetic change in a fraction of lung tumors, according to two other studies published today in Nature Medicine. Until the three new studies, the genetic change had never been seen in any cancer, said Dr. Pasi Janne.

The change fuses two unrelated genes together to form KIF5B-RET, turning on a growth-driving protein called RET that is usually not active in lung cells.

When Pasi Janne and his collaborators treated cells with the aberrant gene using Pfizer’s Sutent or AstraZeneca Plc (AZN)’s thyroid-cancer drug Caprelsa, the cells died. Both drugs block RET.

http://www.google.com/search?q=pasi+janne+lab&hl=en&tbo=u&tbm=isch&source=univ&sa=X&ei=GzXzUMCyHYSK0QGouoCoAw&ved=0CD8QsAQ&biw=1140&bih=731

Pasi Antero Janne, M.D.,Ph.D.

Harvard Catalyst Profiles

http://connects.catalyst.harvard.edu/profiles/profile/person/711

  1. Yuen HF, Abramczyk O, Montgomery G, Chan KK, Huang YH, Sasazuki T, Shirasawa S, Gopesh S, Chan KW, Fennell D, Janne P, El-Tanani M, Murray JT. Impact of oncogenic driver mutations on feedback between the PI3K and MEK pathways in cancer cells. Biosci Rep. 2012 Aug 1; 32(4):413-22.
    View in: PubMed
  2. Tanizaki J, Okamoto I, Takezawa K, Sakai K, Azuma K, Kuwata K, Yamaguchi H, Hatashita E, Nishio K, Janne PA, Nakagawa K. Combined effect of ALK and MEK inhibitors in EML4-ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer cells. Br J Cancer. 2012 Feb 14; 106(4):763-7.
    View in: PubMed
  3. Vogelzang NJ, Benowitz SI, Adams S, Aghajanian C, Chang SM, Dreyer ZE, Janne PA, Ko AH, Masters GA, Odenike O, Patel JD, Roth BJ, Samlowski WE, Seidman AD, Tap WD, Temel JS, Von Roenn JH, Kris MG. Clinical cancer advances 2011: annual report on progress against cancer from the american society of clinical oncology. J Clin Oncol. 2012 Jan 1; 30(1):88-109.
    View in: PubMed
  4. Yuen HF, Chan KK, Grills C, Murray JT, Platt-Higgins A, Eldin OS, O’Byrne K, Janne P, Fennell DA, Johnston PG, Rudland PS, El-Tanani M. Ran Is a Potential Therapeutic Target for Cancer Cells with Molecular Changes Associated with Activation of the PI3K/Akt/mTORC1 and Ras/MEK/ERK Pathways. Clin Cancer Res. 2012 Jan 15; 18(2):380-91.
    View in: PubMed
  5. Hammerman PS, Sos ML, Ramos AH, Xu C, Dutt A, Zhou W, Brace LE, Woods BA, Lin W, Zhang J, Deng X, Lim SM, Heynck S, Peifer M, Simard JR, Lawrence MS, Onofrio RC, Salvesen HB, Seidel D, Zander T, Heuckmann JM, Soltermann A, Moch H, Koker M, Leenders F, Gabler F, Querings S, Ansén S, Brambilla E, Brambilla C, Lorimier P, Brustugun OT, Helland A, Petersen I, Clement JH, Groen H, Timens W, Sietsma H, Stoelben E, Wolf J, Beer DG, Tsao MS, Hanna M, Hatton C, Eck MJ, Janne PA, Johnson BE, Winckler W, Greulich H, Bass AJ, Cho J, Rauh D, Gray NS, Wong KK, Haura EB, Thomas RK, Meyerson M. Mutations in the DDR2 kinase gene identify a novel therapeutic target in squamous cell lung cancer. Cancer Discov. 2011 Jun; 1(1):78-89.
    View in: PubMed
  6. Weisberg E, Choi HG, Ray A, Barrett R, Zhang J, Sim T, Zhou W, Seeliger M, Cameron M, Azam M, Fletcher JA, Debiec-Rychter M, Mayeda M, Moreno D, Kung AL, Janne PA, Khosravi-Far R, Melo JV, Manley PW, Adamia S, Wu C, Gray N, Griffin JD. Discovery of a small-molecule type II inhibitor of wild-type and gatekeeper mutants of BCR-ABL, PDGFRalpha, Kit, and Src kinases: novel type II inhibitor of gatekeeper mutants. Blood. 2010 May 27; 115(21):4206-16.
    View in: PubMed
  7. Beroukhim R, Mermel CH, Porter D, Wei G, Raychaudhuri S, Donovan J, Barretina J, Boehm JS, Dobson J, Urashima M, Mc Henry KT, Pinchback RM, Ligon AH, Cho YJ, Haery L, Greulich H, Reich M, Winckler W, Lawrence MS, Weir BA, Tanaka KE, Chiang DY, Bass AJ, Loo A, Hoffman C, Prensner J, Liefeld T, Gao Q, Yecies D, Signoretti S, Maher E, Kaye FJ, Sasaki H, Tepper JE, Fletcher JA, Tabernero J, Baselga J, Tsao MS, Demichelis F, Rubin MA, Janne PA, Daly MJ, Nucera C, Levine RL, Ebert BL, Gabriel S, Rustgi AK, Antonescu CR, Ladanyi M, Letai A, Garraway LA, Loda M, Beer DG, True LD, Okamoto A, Pomeroy SL, Singer S, Golub TR, Lander ES, Getz G, Sellers WR, Meyerson M. The landscape of somatic copy-number alteration across human cancers. Nature. 2010 Feb 18; 463(7283):899-905.
    View in: PubMed
  8. Qin W, Kozlowski P, Taillon BE, Bouffard P, Holmes AJ, Janne P, Camposano S, Thiele E, Franz D, Kwiatkowski DJ. Ultra deep sequencing detects a low rate of mosaic mutations in tuberous sclerosis complex. Hum Genet. 2010 Mar; 127(5):573-82.
    View in: PubMed
  9. Rodig SJ, Mino-Kenudson M, Dacic S, Yeap BY, Shaw A, Barletta JA, Stubbs H, Law K, Lindeman N, Mark E, Janne PA, Lynch T, Johnson BE, Iafrate AJ, Chirieac LR. Unique clinicopathologic features characterize ALK-rearranged lung adenocarcinoma in the western population. Clin Cancer Res. 2009 Aug 15; 15(16):5216-23.
    View in: PubMed
  10. Lynch TJ, Blumenschein GR, Engelman JA, Espinoza-Delgado I, Govindan R, Hanke J, Hanna NH, Heymach JV, Hirsch FR, Janne PA, Lilenbaum RC, Natale RB, Riely GJ, Sequist LV, Shapiro GI, Shaw A, Shepherd FA, Socinski M, Sorensen AG, Wakelee HA, Weitzman A. Summary statement novel agents in the treatment of lung cancer: Fifth Cambridge Conference assessing opportunities for combination therapy. J Thorac Oncol. 2008 Jun; 3(6 Suppl 2):S107-12.
    View in: PubMed
     

Read Full Post »

Author & Curator: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

Article ID #16: Paradigm Shift in Human Genomics – Predictive Biomarkers and Personalized Medicine – Part 1. Published on 1/13/2013

WordCloud Image Produced by Adam Tubman

Cancer Diagnostics by Genomic Sequencing: ‘No’ to Sequencing Patient’s DNA, ‘No’ to Sequencing Patient’s Tumor, ‘Yes’ to focus on Gene Mutation Aberration & Analysis of Gene Abnormalities

How to Tailor Cancer Therapy to the particular Genetics of a patient’s Cancer

THIS IS A SERIES OF FOUR POINTS OF VIEW IN SUPPORT OF the Paradigm Shift in Human Genomics

‘No’ to Sequencing Patient’s DNA, ‘No’ to Sequencing Patient’s Tumor, ‘Yes’ to focus on Gene Mutation Aberration & Analysis of Gene Abnormalities

PRESENTED in the following FOUR PARTS. Recommended to be read in its entirety for completeness and arrival to the End Point of Present and Future Frontier of Research in Genomics

Part 1:

Research Paradigm Shift in Human Genomics – Predictive Biomarkers and Personalized Medicine

Part 2:

LEADERS in the Competitive Space of Genome Sequencing of Genetic Mutations for Therapeutic Drug Selection in Cancer Personalized Treatment

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/13/leaders-in-genome-sequencing-of-genetic-mutations-for-therapeutic-drug-selection-in-cancer-personalized-treatment-part-2/

Part 3:

Personalized Medicine: An Institute Profile – Coriell Institute for Medical Research

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/13/personalized-medicine-an-institute-profile-coriell-institute-for-medical-research-part-3/

Part 4:

The Consumer Market for Personal DNA Sequencing

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/13/consumer-market-for-personal-dna-sequencing-part-4/

 

Part 1:

Research Paradigm Shift in Human Genomics – Predictive Biomarkers and Personalized Medicine

 

In Part 1, we will address the following FIVE DIRECTIONS in Genomics Research

  • ‘No’ to Sequencing Patient’s DNA, ‘No’ to Sequencing Patient’s Tumor, ‘Yes’ to focus on Gene Mutation Aberration & Analysis of Gene Abnormalities
  • Sequencing DNA from individual cells vs “humans as a whole.” Sequencing DNA from individual cells is changing the way that researchers think of humans as a whole.
  • Promising Research Directions By Watson, 1/10/2013
  • Disruption of Cancer Metabolism targeted by Metabolic Gatekeeper
  • Molecular Analysis of the different Stages of  Cancer Progression for Targeting Therapy

First:

Predictive Biomarkers and Personalized Medicine

No to Sequencing Patient’s DNA, No to Sequencing Patient’s Tumor, Yes to focus on Gene Mutation Aberration & Analysis of Gene Abnormalities

 

MD Anderson Research

targeted agents matched with tumor molecular aberrations.

Molecular analysis

Patients whose tumors had an aberration were treated with matched targeted therapy, compared with those of consecutive patients who were not treated with matched targeted therapy

Results

40.2% – 1 or more aberration.

In 1 aberration , matched tx higher response rate  27% vs 5%

Longer time ot treatment failure  TTF 5.2 vs. 2.2

Longer survival  13.4 vs. 9 months

Pt. w/1 mutation (molecular aberrationMatched targeted therapy associated with longer TTF vs. prior systemic therapy 5.2 vs. 3.1

matched therapy was an independent factor predicting response superior to TTF

Conclusion

Not randomized study, and patients had diverse tumor types and a median of 5 prior therapies,  results suggest that identifying specific molecular abnormalities and choosing therapy based on these abnormalities is relevant in phase I clinical trials

Clin Cancer Res. 2012 Nov 15;18(22):6373-83. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-12-1627. Epub 2012 Sep 10.

Personalized medicine in a phase I clinical trials program: the MD Anderson Cancer Center initiative.

Tsimberidou AM, Iskander NG, Hong DS, Wheler JJ, Falchook GS, Fu S, Piha-Paul S, Naing A, Janku F, Luthra R, Ye Y, Wen S, Berry D, Kurzrock R.

Source

Department of Investigational Cancer Therapeutics, Phase I Clinical Trials Program, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas 77030, USA. atsimber@mdanderson.org

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=22966018

 

Opinion by Dr. Pierluigi Scalia, 1/11/2013.

The fact of using nanotechnology in order to target and treat abnormal cancer cells and tissues adds a powerful weapon towards eradicating the disease in the foreseeable future. However, focusing on weapons when we still have not found a reliable way to build that personalized “shooting target” (Cancer Fingerprinting) still constitutes, in my opinion, the single most relevant barrier to the adoption of Personalized treatments.

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/09/nanotechnology-personalized-medicine-and-dna-sequencing/

Ritu Saxena’s interview

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/07/personalized-medicine-gearing-up-to-tackle-cancer/

Other studies supporting this perspective

 

p53 gene deletion predicts for poor survival and non-response to therapy with purine analogs in chronic B-cell leukemias

 

Chromosome aberrations in solid tumors

 

Chromosome aberrations in B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia: reassessment based on molecular cytogenetic analysis

 

Multivariate analysis of prognostic factors in CLL: clinical stage, IGVH gene mutational status, and loss or mutation of the p53 gene are independent prognostic factors

 

Clonal analysis of delayed karyotypic abnormalities and gene mutations in radiation-induced genetic instability.

 

Comprehensive genetic characterization of CLL: a study on 506 cases analysed with chromosome banding analysis, interphase FISH, IgVH status and …

 

Detection of aberrations of the p53 alleles and the gene transcript in human tumor cell lines by single-strand conformation polymorphism analysis

 

Genetic aberrations detected by comparative genomic hybridization are associated with clinical outcome in renal cell carcinoma

 

VH mutation status, CD38 expression level, genomic aberrations, and survival in chronic lymphocytic leukemia

 

Microarray gene expression profiling of B-cell chronic lymphocytic leukemia subgroups defined by genomic aberrations and VH mutation status

 

… nucleophosmin (NPM1) predicts favorable prognosis in younger adults with acute myeloid leukemia and normal cytogenetics: interaction with other gene mutations

 

Transformation of follicular lymphoma to diffuse large cell lymphoma is associated with a heterogeneous set of DNA copy number and gene expression alterations

[DOC] Pax 6 Gene Research and the Pancreas

 

Molecular analysis of the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor gene p27/Kip1 in human malignancies

Molecular genetic analysis of oligodendroglial tumors shows preferential allelic deletions on 19q and 1p.

Cytogenetic analysis of soft tissue sarcomas: recurrent chromosome abnormalities in malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNST)

Radiation-induced genomic instability: delayed cytogenetic aberrations and apoptosis in primary human bone marrow cells

SOURCES

Search:

Gene Mutation Aberration & Analysis of Gene Abnormalities

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?start=20&q=Gene+Mutation+Aberration+%26+Analysis+of+Gene+Abnormalities&hl=en&as_sdt=0,22&as_vis=1

Second:

Sequencing DNA from individual cells vs “humans as a whole.”

Sequencing DNA from individual cells is changing the way that researchers think of humans as a whole.

The ability to sequence single cells meant that researchers could take another approach. Working with a team at the Chinese sequencing powerhouse BGI, Auton sequenced nearly 200 sperm cells and was able to estimate the recombination rate for the man who had donated them. The work is not yet published, but Auton says that the group found an average of 24.5 recombination events per sperm cell, which is in line with estimates from indirect experiments2. Stephen Quake, a bioengineer at Stanford University in California, has performed similar experiments in 100 sperm cells and identified several places in the genome in which recombination is more likely to occur. The location of these recombination ‘hotspots’ could help population biologists to map the position of genetic variants associated with disease.

Quake also sequenced half a dozen of those 100 sperm in greater depth, and was able to determine the rate at which new mutations arise: about 30 mutations per billion bases per generation3, which is slightly higher than what others have found. “It’s basically the population biology of a sperm sample,” Quake says, and it will allow researchers to study meiosis and recombination in greater detail.

Fig1a

SOURCES:

http://www.nature.com/news/genomics-the-single-life-1.11710#/genome

Nature 491, 27–29 (01 November 2012) doi:10.1038/491027a

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/11/05/every-sperm-is-sacred-sequencing-dna-from-individual-cells-vs-humans-as-a-whole/

 

Third:

Promising Research Directions By Watson, 1/10/2013

The main reason drugs that target genetic glitches are not cures is that cancer cells have a work-around. If one biochemical pathway to growth and proliferation is blocked by a drug — the cancer cells activate a different, equally effective pathway.

Watson advocates a different approach: targeting features that all cancer cells, especially those in metastatic cancers, have in common.

A protein in cells called Myc. It controls more than 1,000 other molecules inside cells, including many involved in cancer. Studies suggest that turning off Myc causes cancer cells to self-destruct in a process called apoptosis.

cancer biologist Hans-Guido Wendel of Sloan-Kettering. “Blocking production of Myc is an interesting line of investigation. I think there’s promise in that.”

Personalized medicine” that targets a patient’s specific cancer-causing mutation

Watson wrote, may be “the inherently conservative nature of today’s cancer research establishments.”

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/09/the-cancer-establishments-examined-by-james-watson-co-discover-of-dna-wcrick-41953/

 

Opinion by Dr. Stephen Willliams, 1/11/2013

Kudos to both Watson and Weinstein for stating we really need to delve into tumor biology to determine functional pathways (like metabolism) which are a common feature of the malignant state ( also see my posting on differentiation therapy).

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/09/the-cancer-establishments-examined-by-james-watson-co-discover-of-dna-wcrick-41953/

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/03/differentiation-therapy-epigenetics-tackles-solid-tumors/

Fourth:

Disruption of Cancer Metabolism targeted by Metabolic Gatekeeper

Fig2a

Figure’s SOURCE:

Figure brought to my attention by Dr. Tilda Barlyia, 1/10/2013

http://blogs.nature.com/spoonful/2012/12/metabolic-gatekeeper-provides-new-target-for-disrupting-cancer-metabolism.html

Author: Yevgeniy Grigoryev

In the 1920s, the German physiologist Otto Warburgproposed that cancer cells generate energy in ways that are distinct from normal cells. Healthy cells mainly metabolize sugar via respiration in the mitochondria, switching only to glycolysis in the cytoplasm when oxygen levels are low. In contrast, cancer cells rely on glycolysis all the time, even under oxygen-rich scenarios. This shift in how energy is produced—the so-called ‘Warburg effect’, as the observation came to be known—is now recognized as a primary driver of tumor formation, but a mechanistic explanation for the phenomenon has remained elusive.

Now, researchers have implicated a chromatin regulator known as SIRT6 as a key mediator of the switch to glycolysis in cancer cells, a finding that could lead to new therapeutic modalities. “This work is very significant for the cancer field,” says Andrei Seluanov, a cancer biologist at the University of Rochester in New York State who studies SIRT6 but was not involved in the latest study. “It establishes the role ofSIRT6 as a tumor suppressor and shows that SIRT6 loss leads to tumor formation in mice and humans.”

SIRT6 encodes one of seven mammalian proteins called sirtuins, a group of histone deacetylases that play a role in regulating metabolism, lifespan and aging. SIRT1—which is activated by resveratrol, a molecule found in the skin of red grapes—is perhaps the best known sirtuin, but several of the others are now the focus of active investigation as therapeutic targets for a range of conditions, from metabolic syndrome tocancer. Just last month, for example, a paper in Nature Medicine demonstrated that SIRT6 plays an important role in heart disease.

Six years ago, a team led by Raul Mostoslavsky, a molecular biologist at the Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center in Boston, first showed that SIRT6 protects mice from DNA damage and had anti-aging properties. In 2010, the same team established SIRT6 as a critical regulator of glycolysis. Now,reporting today in Cell, Mostoslavsky and his colleagues have shown that SIRT6 function is lost in cancer cells—thus, definitively establishing SIRT6 as a potent tumor suppressor.

In the latest study, the researchers showed that mouse embryonic cells genetically engineered to lackSIRT6 proliferated much faster than normal cells, growing from 5,000 cells to 200,000 cells in three days. In contrast, SIRT6-expressiong cells grew at less than half that rate over the same time period. When injected into adult mice, these SIRT6-deficient cells also rapidly formed tumors, but this tumor growth was reversed when the scientists put SIRT6 back into the cells.

“Our study provides a proof-of-concept that inhibiting glycolysis in SIRT6-deficient cells and tumors could provide a potential therapeutic approach to combat cancer,” says Mostoslavsky. “Additionally, SIRT6 may be a valuable prognostic biomarker for cancer detection.”

Currently, there are no approved anti-glycolytic drugs against cancer. However, the latest findings indicate that pharmacologically elevating SIRT6 levels might help keep tumor growth at bay. And there’s preliminary data to suggest that the work will translate from the bench to the clinic: looking at a range of cancers from human patients, Mostoslavsky’s team showed that the higher the level of SIRT6 the better the prognosis and the longer the survival times.

SOURCE:

Fifth:

Molecular Analysis of the different Stages of  Cancer Progression: The Example of Breast Cancer 

Fig2b

Figure’s SOURCE:

The molecular pathology of breast cancer progression

Alessandro Bombonati1 and Dennis C Sgroi1,2* Journal of Pathology, J Pathol 2011; 223: 307–317

(wileyonlinelibrary.com) DOI: 10.1002/path.2808

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1002/path.2808/asset/2808_ftp.pdf;jsessionid=26C2C424E6948A5FAF3CBADBA385184A.d02t04v=1&t=hi26qzd4&s=a8a4aadb3fc6d448080c0ef3c67415b8277145aa

Post by Dr. Tilda Barlyia and Comments on   “The Molecular Pathology of Breast Cancer Progression”

http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2013/01/10/the-molecular-pathology-of-breast-cancer-progression/

Conclusion

The Paradigm Shift in Human Genomics will follow the following FIVE DIRECTIONS:

  • No to Sequencing Patient’s DNA, No to Sequencing Patient’s Tumor, Yes to focus on Gene Mutation Aberration & Analysis of Gene Abnormalities
  • Sequencing DNA from individual cells vs “humans as a whole.” Sequencing DNA from individual cells is changing the way that researchers think of humans as a whole.
  • Promising Research Directions By Watson, 1/10/2013
  • Disruption of Cancer Metabolism targeted by Metabolic Gatekeeper
  • Molecular Analysis of the different Stages of  Cancer Progression for Targeting Therapy

Read Full Post »

Heroes in Medical Research: Barnett Rosenberg and the Discovery of Cisplatin (Translating Basic Research to the Clinic)

Author/Writer: Stephen J. Williams, Ph.D.

This will be a regular posting which I hope people will find interesting.  I wish to highlight the basic research which led to seminal breakthroughs in the medical field, brought on by the result of basic inquiry, thorough and detailed investigation, meticulously following the scientific method, and eventually leading to development of important medical therapies.

This month I would like to highlight the research of Dr. Barnett Rosenberg and his discovery of one of the most used and effective chemotherapeutics, cisplatin.

Cisplatin_ALX-400-040

The compound cis-PtCl2(NH3)2 (seen in the Figure ) was first described by M. Peyrone in 1845, and known for a long time as Peyrone’s salt.[3] In 1965, Barnett Rosenberg, van Camp et al. of Michigan State University  had asked a simple question and noticed that electrical fields can inhibit the division and induce filamentous growth  of Escherichia coli (E. coli) bacteria. . Although bacterial cell growth continued, cell division was arrested, the bacteria growing as filaments up to 300 times their normal length.[5]  However, Dr. Roenberg did not stop at this finding and meticulously accounting for each variable which might explain this finding, including altering the metal composistion of the electrodes.  Dr. Rosenberg thought of the possibility it was not the electric field perse, which caused the growth inhibition, but a chemical produced in the media by electrolysis.  Eventually he discovered that electrolysis of platinum electrodes generated a soluble platinum complex which inhibited binary fission in Escherichia coli (E. coli) bacteria.  In addition he isolated this platinum complex and discovered that ammonium ions were required as well, owing to the full chemical structure of cisplatin as seen above (the nitrogens moieties are bioactivated to cations). This finding led to the observation that cis PtCl2(NH3)2 was indeed highly effective at regressing the mass of sarcomas in rats.[8] Confirmation of this discovery, and extension of testing to other tumour cell lines launched the medicinal applications of cisplatin. Cisplatin was approved for use in testicular and ovarian cancers by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration on December 19, 1978.[9]

  • ^ Peyrone M. (1844). “Ueber die Einwirkung des Ammoniaks auf Platinchlorür”. Ann Chemie Pharm 51 (1): 1–29. doi:10.1002/jlac.18440510102.
  • ^ a b c Stephen Trzaska (20 June 2005). “Cisplatin”. C&EN News 83 (25).
  • ^ Rosenberg, B.; Van Camp, L.; Krigas, T. (1965). “Inhibition of cell division in Escherichia coli by electrolysis products from a platinum electrode”. Nature 205 (4972): 698–699. doi:10.1038/205698a0. PMID 14287410.

Barnett Rosenberg

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

403px-Nci-vol-8173-300_barnett_rosenberg

Barnett Rosenberg

Born November 16, 1926
New York, New York
Died August 8, 2009
Lansing, Michigan
Fields Physics/Biophysics
Institutions Michigan State University
Known for Cisplatin

Barnett Rosenberg (16 November 1926 – 8 August 2009) was an American chemist best known for the discovery of the anti-cancer drug cisplatin.[1]

Rosenberg graduated from Brooklyn College in 1948 and obtained his PhD in Physics at New York University (NYU) in 1956. He joined Michigan State University in 1961 and worked there until 1997.

In 1965, Rosenberg and his colleagues proved that certain platinum-containing compounds inhibited cell division and then in 1969 showed that they cured solid tumors. The chemotherapy drug that eventually resulted from this work, cisplatin, obtained US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval in 1978 and went on to become a widely used anticancer drug. The initial discovery was quite serendipitous. Rosenberg was looking into the effects of an electric field on the growth of bacteria. He noticed that bacteria ceased to divide when placed in an electric field and eventually pinned down the cause of this phenomenon to the platinum electrode he was using.[2]

He was awarded the Charles F. Kettering Prize in 1984 and the Harvey Prize in 1984. [3]

  1. ^ Rosenberg, B.; Van Camp, L.; Krigas, T. (1965). “Inhibition of Cell Division in Escherichia coli by Electrolysis Products from a Platinum Electrode”. Nature 205 (4972): 698–9. doi:10.1038/205698a0. PMID 14287410. edit
  2. ^ Petsko, G. A. (2002). “A christmas carol”. Genome biology 3 (1): COMMENT1001. PMC 150444. PMID 11806819edit
  3. ^ http://visualsonline.cancer.gov/details.cfm?imageid=8173

Other posts of interest  in this site  include:

Interview with the co-discoverer of the structure of DNA: Watson on The Double Helix and his changing view of Rosalind Franklin

Otto Warburg, A Giant of Modern Cellular Biology

Inspiration From Dr. Maureen Cronin’s Achievements in Applying Genomic Sequencing to Cancer Diagnostics

Read Full Post »

PCI Outcomes, Increased Ischemic Risk associated with Elevated Plasma Fibrinogen not Platelet Reactivity

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

Article ID #13: PCI Outcomes, Increased Ischemic Risk associated with Elevated Plasma Fibrinogen not Platelet Reactivity. Published on 1/10/2013

WordCloud Image Produced by Adam Tubman

 

Q&A Session between Dr. Michael Ward and Dr. Larry Bernstein presented for in our Research Category on 

Interviews with Scientific Leaders

Primary research:

Ang L, et al “Elevated plasma fibrinogen rather than residual platelet reactivity after clopidogrel pre-treatment is associated with an increased ischemic risk during elective percutaneous coronary intervention” J Am Coll Cardiol2013; 61: 23-34.

 

Question by DR. MICHAEL WARD

How ironic that an old diagnostic parameter should
reappear in the limelight of diagnostic predictors.

Of course, decades ago, doctors asked for “sed rates”, seeking to know if red cells, thought to be bound to fibrinogen, settled faster in a patient compared to a control subject’s blood. Fibrinogen has always been a diagnostic number in evaluating inflammatory results.

However, the diagnostic world, like the worlds of pharmaceuticals, medical devices, biologics, and other industries, always seek the ‘new kid on the block’ to differentiate themselves from the rest of the pack in the
marketplace.

So there was a binge (and still is) to seek new and exotic blood proteins that are surrogate markers for specific diagnoses or prognoses.

That is the irony, that in this case at least, fibrinogen has come full circle. Biology works in mysterious ways.

Answer by Dr. Larry Bernstein, MD, FCAP

Dear Dr. M.  Ward:

Doctors asked for “sed rates”, seeking to know if red cells, thought to be bound to fibrinogen, settled faster in a patient compared to a control
subject’s blood. Fibrinogen has always been a diagnostic number in evaluating inflammatory results.

You are quite right that physicians used “sed rates” as a measure of inflammation, and more in Lupus Erythematosis, Rheumatoid Arthritis, Nephritides, Systemic Sclerosis, and so forth.  The “sed rate” was not a part of the thinking about CVD, and PCI didn’t exist.  Recently, MI post-PCI has been defined as a type (NSTEMI?).

Yes. In principle, the sed rate is related to fibrinogen and red-cell aggregation.  I am not prepared to accept that a platelet count over 400,000 would make no contribution, even if many of the PCI related infarcts are within a range of 150-300,000.  I don’t know how much power there is in the discussion.  The role of tissue factor (plaque), and of platelets in hemostasis is undeniable.

The industry does look for every opportunity to seize on promising biomarkers.  The coagulation assays developed at Dade-Behring (Dade, Dupont Division; then Dade) were far better and more explanatory that the “sed rate”.  The sed rate measurement requires that you set up graduated tubes to watch the rate of sedimentation.  It is not a walkaway procedure.  Industry has been so good at introducing automation that led to high volume efficiency, that this led to the only part of hospital operations that had good accounting measures.  The long trip to reducing personnel, but of course the profiles were a piece of cake.  I continually reorganized to carve out services for immunology and toxicology, which took longer to get automated.

The only use for sed rate now is for Temporal Thrombosis (?).

In the early days Yale NH Hospital had some 5 Perkin Elmer HPLCs to measure calcium.  Electrophoretic separation of isoenzymes was not helpful for managing patients.  The procedure was run batchwise once a day.  I was the first in CT to be running the immunoassay three times a day on the Roche COBAS Bio CFA., and Dupont put it on the ‘aca’.  A med tech could run it at 3 am  at Detroit Receiving, Bellevue, or Cook County, when the phone didn’t stop ringing for STAT results.

Physicians had expectations too.  So we had the progression from AST, LDH, and CK to isoenzyme MBCK, and then there were the cancer biomarkers – CEA, CA-125, PSA, with much to be discussed.

 

Q&A is derived from the following Article in

MedPage Today

Published: January 07, 2013

Fibrinogen Level Tied to Poorer PCI Outcomes

By Todd Neale, Senior Staff Writer, MedPage Today

Published: January 07, 2013

Reviewed by Robert Jasmer, MD; Associate Clinical Professor of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco and Dorothy Caputo, MA, BSN, RN, Nurse Planner

An elevated serum fibrinogen level predicted worse short-term ischemic outcomes among patients undergoing elective percutaneous coronary intervention after pretreatment with clopidogrel, researchers found.

Significantly higher levels of fibrinogen were seen in patients with periprocedural myocardial infarction (MI) defined by either creatine kinase-myocardial band (CK-MB) or troponin (P<0.02 for both), according to Ehtisham Mahmud, MD, of the University of California, San Diego, and colleagues.

Those relationships remained consistent after adjustment for several factors, including platelet function, which was not itself associated with periprocedural MI, the researchers reported in the Jan. 8 issue of the Journal of the American College of Cardiology.

“The results of the current study suggest that an elevated fibrinogen level…is related to significant platelet cross-linking and thrombus formation independent of residual P2Y12 receptor-mediated platelet activity during clopidogrel therapy,” they wrote.

Higher risk of ischemic cardiovascular events has been observed with both high platelet reactivity after thienopyridine treatment and elevated serum fibrinogen.

“As an acute phase reactant involved in the final common pathway of the coagulation cascade and essential component of platelet cross-linking in thrombus formation, fibrinogen possesses a clear biological mechanism for its adverse cardiovascular effects,” Mahmud and colleagues wrote.

In fact, high levels of serum fibrinogen have been shown to contribute to high platelet reactivity during clopidogrel treatment, resulting in uncertainty about whether insufficient platelet inhibition and elevated fibrinogen levels are independent or interactive risk factors for ischemic events.

To explore the issue, the researchers looked at data from 189 patients undergoing elective PCI who were pretreated with clopidogrel, defined as 75 mg daily for at least 7 days or a 600-mg bolus at least 12 hours before study enrollment. The mean age of the patients was 63.8 and most (74.1%) were male.

Nearly two-thirds (63%) had undergone a previous PCI, and 18% had undergone revascularization with coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG).

Baseline platelet function was measured using the VerifyNow P2Y12 assay. Markers of ischemic myocardial injury, including troponin and CK-MB, were measured every 8 hours after PCI until hospital discharge.

Periprocedural MI defined by troponin I or T occurred in 13.9% of patients. Those who had an MI had significantly higher levels of fibrinogen (363.1 versus 309.1 mg/dL, P=0.017).

The rate of CK-MB-defined periprocedural MI was 5.8%. Patients with that outcome also had elevated levels of fibrinogen (403.4 versus 313.5 mg/dL, P=0.007).

Both differences remained significant after multivariate adjustment that accounted for platelet function and other inflammatory markers.

The researchers found that a fibrinogen level of 345 mg/dL or higher — a cutoff identified as having optimal combined sensitivity and specificity for CK-MB-defined periprocedural MI — was associated with periprocedural MI defined by either troponin or CK-MB (P<0.04 for both).

Those relationships were stronger when systemic inflammation was low (C-reactive protein ≤0.5 mg/dL).

The platelet reactivity measurements were not associated with either definition of periprocedural MI, which is inconsistent with the findings from several smaller studies. The authors noted, however, that “the significance of these negative findings may be limited due to inadequate study power.”

In discussing the limitations of the study, the researchers pointed out that “the findings … do not provide insight into whether the relationship between high platelet reactivity and ischemic cardiovascular events demonstrated in previous studies is a direct one or mediated through the effect of serum fibrinogen.”

To get to the bottom of that, they wrote, “future studies relating platelet reactivity and adverse cardiac events should measure baseline fibrinogen.”

Mahmud has received clinical trial support from Accumetrics, Eli Lilly, and sanofi-aventis, and is on the speakers bureau for Medtronic. One of his co-authors is a consultant for Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, St. Jude Medical, Medtronic, and sanofi-aventis.

From the American Heart Association:

Todd Neale

Senior Staff Writer

Todd Neale, MedPage Today Staff Writer, got his start in journalism at Audubon Magazine and made a stop in directory publishing before landing at MedPage Today. He received a B.S. in biology from the University of Massachusetts Amherst and an M.A. in journalism from the Science, Health, and Environmental Reporting program at New York University.

SOURCE:

Read Full Post »

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

Tool Identifies Risk in Stenting ACS Patients

By Todd Neale, Senior Staff Writer, MedPage Today

Published: November 19, 2012
Reviewed by Dori F. Zaleznik, MD; Associate Clinical Professor of Medicine, Harvard Medical School, Boston and Dorothy Caputo, MA, BSN, RN, Nurse Planner

A new, easy-to-calculate risk score developed for patients with non-ST-segment elevation acute coronary syndromes (ACS) undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) had better prognostic accuracy than other widely used risk scores, researchers found.

The ACUITY-PCI risk score includes six variables — insulin-treated diabetes, renal insufficiency, baseline cardiac biomarker elevation or ST-segment deviation, presence of a bifurcation lesion, small vessel/diffuse coronary artery disease, and extent of coronary artery disease, according to Gregg Stone, MD, of Columbia University Medical Center in New York City, and colleagues.

The 1-year rate of death or MI significantly increased from 5.3% in the lowest risk tertile to 9.1% in the middle tertile to 19% in the highest tertile (P<0.001), the researchers reported in the November issue of JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions.

Discrimination and calibration were greater with the ACUITY-PCI score than with other established scores.

“Although the TIMI and the GRACE scores have been shown to be valuable prognostic tools at the time of hospital admission for selecting pharmacological strategies and identifying those patients most likely to benefit from an invasive strategy, they have not been optimized for patients undergoing PCI and, thus, have relatively poor prognostic power to further risk stratify acute coronary syndrome patients undergoing PCI,” Stone and colleagues wrote.

“The ACUITY-PCI score is therefore intended to supplement the TIMI and GRACE scores when an invasive strategy has been undertaken and PCI is being considered.”

The researchers created the risk score using data from 1,692 patients enrolled in the angiographic substudy of the ACUITY trial, which was a comparison of heparin plus a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor, bivalirudin (Angiomax) plus a glycoprotein IIb/IIIa inhibitor, or bivalirudin alone in patients with ACS undergoing an early invasive strategy. They then validated the score using another 846 patients from the same study.

Multivariate analysis revealed six variables that were significantly associated with 1-year mortality and MI and were included in the score. The researchers assigned points based on the strength of the predictor:

  • Insulin-treated diabetes (12 points)
  • Renal insufficiency (12 points)
  • Baseline cardiac biomarker elevation or ST-segment deviation (8 points)
  • Bifurcation lesion (4 points)
  • Small vessel/diffuse coronary artery disease (2 points)
  • Extent of coronary artery disease (1 point for each 10 mm of disease)

The C-statistic for the risk score — a measure of discrimination — was 0.67 in the derivation cohort and 0.70 in the validation cohort. In the validation cohort, the chi-square statistic for calibration was 6.2 and the index of separation was 0.44.

All of those values were better than those seen for four other established risk scores — TIMI, GRACE, SYNTAX, and Clinical SYNTAX. In addition, the net reclassification improvement with the new score ranged from 9% to 38% and the integrated discrimination index varied from 1.9% to 2.7%.

The researchers noted that the ACUITY-PCI score also was a good predictor of 1-year definite or probable stent thrombosis, with a C-statistic of 0.72.

In another study in the same journal, George Dangas, MD, PhD, of Mount Sinai Medical Center in New York City, and colleagues — including Stone — reported on the development of a risk score specifically for stent thrombosis in patients with ACS undergoing PCI.

The study included 6,139 patients from the HORIZONS-AMI and ACUITY trials, which included those with ST-segment elevation MI (STEMI) in the former trial and those with non-STEMI and unstable angina in the latter. The researchers used 4,093 patients for the derivation cohort and 2,046 for the validation cohort.

The risk score included 10 variables that were significantly associated with the risk of Academic Research Consortium-defined definite or probable stent thrombosis at 1 year:

  • Type of acute coronary syndrome (4 points for STEMI, 2 points for non-ST-segment elevation ACS with ST deviation, and 1 point for non-ST-segment elevation ACS without ST changes)
  • Current smoking (1 point)
  • Insulin-dependent diabetes (2 points)
  • Prior PCI (1 point)
  • Baseline platelet count (1 point for 250 to 400 K/µL and 2 points for more than 400 K/µL)
  • Absence of pre-PCI heparin therapy (1 point)
  • Aneurysmal/ulcerated lesion (2 points)
  • Baseline TIMI flow grade 0/1 (1 point)
  • Final TIMI flow grade less than 3 (1 point)
  • Number of treated vessels (1 point for two vessels and 2 points for three vessels)

Scores from 1 to 6 are considered low risk, 7 to 9 are intermediate risk, and 10 or higher are high risk.

The rates of stent thrombosis at 1 year were 1.36%, 3.06%, and 9.18% across the three risk tertiles in the derivation cohort (P<0.001 for trend), with a similar trend seen in the validation cohort.

The C-statistics were 0.67 in the derivation cohort and 0.66 in the validation cohort. Performance was comparable for events occurring both early (within the first 30 days) and late (from 1 month to 1 year).

“We believe that the development and initial validation of this stent thrombosis risk score can be a useful tool for both clinical practice and future clinical investigation (future analyses of trials or registries), as it can be a simple way to risk stratify patients immediately following a procedure,” Dangas and colleagues wrote. “The risk score could also be used in the informed consent process to better inform patients of their individual risk of stent thrombosis.”

But Ron Waksman, MD, and Israel Barbash, MD, of MedStar Washington Hospital Center in Washington, D.C., noted some limitations of the tool, including the pooling of different types of patients, the exclusion of important variables associated with stent thrombosis risk, and the use of mostly first-generation drug-eluting stents in the trials.

“It is imperative that the user of such a prediction tool be aware of its capabilities and performance, as well as its limitations, in various clinical scenarios,” they wrote in an accompanying editorial.

“A newly developed risk score for stent thrombosis should be robust and should be tested across broad study populations, stents, and antiplatelet regimens. A new model should also be validated in a setting different from the one in which it was derived,” they wrote. “Unfortunately, this is not the case with the newly proposed model.”

“Until such an encompassing tool is developed and validated,” they wrote, “one should rely on the known stent thrombosis risk factors and tailor an appropriate treatment for each patient.”

The ACUITY trial was funded by The Medicines Company and Nycomed.

Stone has served as a consultant to Abbott Vascular, Boston Scientific, Medtronic, and The Medicines Company. His co-authors reported relationships with Abbott, Regado, Ortho McNeil, Janssen, Merck, Maya Medical, AstraZeneca, Sanofi/Bristol-Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, and Daiichi Sankyo.

The HORIZONS-AMI trial was supported by the Cardiovascular Research Foundation, with grant support from Boston Scientific and The Medicines Company.

Dangas has received speaker honoraria from AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, The Medicines Company, sanofi-aventis, and Abbott Vascular. His co-authors reported relationships with sanofi-aventis, The Medicines Company, Abbott Vascular, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cordis, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly, Maquet, Roche, Boehringer Ingelheim, Liposcience, Merck, Pozen, Gilead Sciences, WebMD, the NIH, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, Schering-Plough, Merck Sharpe and Dohme, GlaxoSmithKline, Regado Biosciences, Boston Scientific, and Bristol-Myers Squibb/Sanofi.

Waksman and Barbash reported that they had no conflicts of interest.

From the American Heart Association:

Primary source: JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
Source reference:
Palmerini T, et al “A new score for risk stratification of patients with acute coronary syndromes undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention: the ACUITY-PCI (Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy-Percutaneous Coronary Intervention) risk score” JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2012; 5: 1108-1116.

Additional source: JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
Source reference:
Dangas G, et al “Development and validation of a stent thrombosis risk score in patients with acute coronary syndromes” JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2012; 5: 1097-1105.

Additional source: JACC: Cardiovascular Interventions
Source reference:
Waksman R, Barbash I “The appropriate use of risk scores” JACC Cardiovasc Interv 2012; 5: 1106-1107.

Todd Neale

Senior Staff Writer

Todd Neale, MedPage Today Staff Writer, got his start in journalism at Audubon Magazine and made a stop in directory publishing before landing at MedPage Today. He received a B.S. in biology from the University of Massachusetts Amherst and an M.A. in journalism from the Science, Health, and Environmental Reporting program at New York University. He is based atMedPage Today headquarters in Little Falls, N.J.

SOURCE:

http://www.medpagetoday.com/Cardiology/AcuteCoronarySyndrome/36010

Read Full Post »

Differentiation Therapy – Epigenetics Tackles Solid Tumors

Author-Writer: Stephen J. Williams, Ph.D.

Updated 4/27/2021

Screen Shot 2021-07-19 at 7.04.21 PM

Word Cloud By Danielle Smolyar

Genetic and epigenetic events within a cell which promote a block in normal development or differentiation coupled with unregulated proliferation are hallmarks of neoplastic transformation.  Differentiation therapy is a chemotherapeutic strategy directed at re-activating endogenous cellular differentiation programs in a tumor cell therefore driving the cancerous cell to a state closer resembling the normal or preneoplastic cell and therefore incurring loss of the tumorigenic phenotype.

This post will deal with:

  • Agents such as histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDACi), retinoids, and PPARϒ agonists which have been shown to reactivate terminal differentiation programs in solid tumors
  • Clinical trials in solid tumors
  • Issues regarding the use of differentiation therapy in solid tumors

This post is a follow-up post to Histone Deacetylase Inhibitors Induce Epithelial-to-Mesenchymal Transition in Prostate Cancer Cells

To put the need for alternate chemotherapeutic strategies in perspective, one is referred to the National Cancer Statistics from http://www.cancer.gov show that 33% of cancer patients, treated with standard cytolytic chemotherapy, will still die within five years (i.e. one in three will die within 5 years).  However the addition of the differentiation agent retinoic acid to standard chemotherapy regimen for treatment of acute promyelocytic leukemia (APML) had improved 5 year survival rates from a range of 50-80% up to near 90% complete remission rates while 75% become disease free, an astonishing success story.  For a review of APML please be referred to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acute_promyelocytic_leukemia.  Briefly, APML is predominantly a result of the chromosomal translocation producing a fusion gene between the promyelocytic leukemia (PML) and RARα receptor genes.  The PML-RARα fusion protein recruits transcriptional repressors, histone deacetylases (HDACs), and DNA methyltransferases.  Treatment with pharmacologic doses of retinoic acid dissociates the PML-RARα from HDACs and results in degradation of PML-RARα, eventually resulting in the differentiation of the myeloid cells in APML.

Dr. Igor Matushansky of Columbia University believes such differentiation therapy could be useful in soft tissue sarcomas, due to the existence of a connective tissue (mesenchymal) stem cell,  in vitro methods which can differentiate these cells into mature tissues, and, from a gene clustering analysis his group had performed, correlation of expression signatures of each liposarcoma subtype throughout the adipocytic differentiation spectrum, including early differentiated to more mature differentiated cells(1).   A parallel study by Riester and colleagues had been able to classify breast tumors and liposarcomas along a phylogenetic tree showing solid tumors can be reclassified based on cell of origin via expression patterns(2).  In addition, other solid tumors, such as ovarian cancer are easily classified, based both on pathologic, histologic, and expression analysis into well and poorly differentiated tumors, correlating differentiation status with prognosis.

Compound Classes which have potential in

differentiation therapy for solid tumors

A. Histone Deacetylase Inhibitors (HDACi)

In eukaryotes, epigenetic post-translational modification of histones is critical for regulation of chromatin structure and gene expression.  Histone deacetylation leads to chromatin compaction and is associated with transcriptional repression of tumor suppressors, cell growth and differentiation.  Therefore, HDACi are promising anti-tumor agents as they may affect the cell cycle, inhibit proliferation, stimulate differentiation and induce apoptotic cell death (3). In a review by Kniptein and Gore, entinostat was found to be a well-tolerated HDACi that demonstrates promising therapeutic potential in both solid and hematologic malignancies(4). The path to the discovery of suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid (SAHA, vorinostat) began over three decades ago with our studies designed to understand why dimethylsulfoxide causes terminal differentiation of the virus-transformed cells, murine erythroleukemia cells. SAHA can cause growth arrest and death of a broad variety of transformed cells both in vitro and in vivo at concentrations that have little or no toxic effects on normal cells (for references see (5). In fact, treatment of MCF-7 breast carcinoma cells with SAHA resulted in morphologic changes resembling epithelial mammary differentiation(6).

HDAC inhibitors

Figure.  Structures of some HDACi used in clinical trials for cancer (see section below)

hdacwithsaha

Figure.  HDAC with SAHA

B. Retinoids

Vitamin A and retinoids play significant roles in basic physiological processes such as vision, reproduction, growth, development, hematopoiesis and immunity (7). Retinoids are the natural derivatives and synthetic analogs of vitamin A. They have been shown to prevent mammary carcinogenesis in rodents (8), to inhibit the growth of human cancer cells in vitro  (9,10) and be effective chemopreventive and chemotherapeutic agents in a variety of human epithelial and hematopoietic tumors (11-14).

Retinoids cannot be synthesized de novo by higher animals and consequently must be consumed in the diet. The two sources of retinoids are animal products that contain retinol and retinyl esters, and plant-derived carotenoids (provitamin A). b-carotene is the most potent vitamin A precursor and has been shown to be an active inhibitor of both tumor initiation and promotion (15).

A major function of retinol, relevant to cancer, is its function as an antioxidant. The antioxidant properties of vitamin A have been shown both in vitro and in vivo (16,17). Retinol deficiency causes oxidative damage to liver mitochondria in rats that can be reversed by vitamin A supplementation (18). A caveat to this is in vitro and in vivo evidence of chronic hypervitaminosis A inducing oxidative DNA damage, as well (19-21). Therefore, it is evident that maintaining the vitamin A concentration within a physiological range is critical to normal cell function because either a deficiency or an excess of vitamin A induces oxidative stress (22). Retinoic acids (RA) (all-trans, 9-cis and 13-cis) are the major biologically active retinoids and exert their effects by regulation of gene expression by binding two families of ligand-activated nuclear retinoid receptors (23). Retinoic acid receptors (RARs) and retinoid X receptors (RXRs) regulate the transcription of a large number of target genes that contain retinoic acid response elements (RAREs) in their promoters. Many of these genes are involved in cancer (13,24) and differentiation (24-26).

Several lines of evidence suggest involvement of defects in retinol signaling in cancer, from the observation that a vitamin A-deficient (VAD) diet leads to an increase in the number of spontaneous and chemically induced tumors in animals (27-29) to the observation that RA itself can induce  differentiation and inhibit the growth of many tumor cells (30-32), as well as the identification that components of the RA signaling pathway are absent in cancer cells (33). Vitamin A and its metabolites have been proposed to have a dual effect in cancer prevention, as antioxidants (16,17,19,34) and differentiating agents (35-37). as it is well accepted that retinoid signaling is integral in maintaining the differentiated state of many cell types (13,38). Additionally, current rationale for chemoprevention with retinoids is based, in part, on the hypothesis that some tumors, may arise due to loss of normal somatic differentiation during tissue repair.

C. PPARϒ Agonists

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor ϒ (PPARϒ) is a member of the steroid hormone receptor superfamily that responds to changes in lipid and glucose homeostasis but has increasing roles in differentiation and tumorigenesis. The first PPAR (PPARα) was discovered during the search of a molecular target for a group of agents then referred to as peroxisome proliferators, as they increased peroxisomal numbers in rodent liver tissue, apart from improving insulin sensitivity.  One of the first agents, developed in the early 80’s for treatment of hyperlipidemia and hperlipoproteinemia, was clofibrate.  All PPAR subtypes heterodimerize with the retinoid-x-receptor (RXR) and, upon binding of ATRA, activate target genes.

PPARϒ agonists have shown potential as a therapeutic in a variety of cancer types including bladder cancer (39), colon cancer(40),  breast cancer(41), prostate cancer(42).  There are numerous studies showing that PPARϒ agonists have anti-tumorigenic activity via anti-proliferative, pro-differentiation and anti-angiogenic mechanisms of action(43). For example, Papi et al. observed that agonists for the retinoid X receptor (6-OH-11-O-hydroxyphenanthrene), retinoic acid receptor (all-trans retinoic acid (RA)) and peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR)-γ (pioglitazone (PGZ)), reduce the survival of MS generated from breast cancer tissues and MCF7 cells, but not from normal mammary gland or MCF10 cells(44) with concomitant upregulation of differentiation markers.

A great website for further information on PPAR is Dr. Jack Vanden Heuvel, Professor of Toxicology at Penn State University at http://ppar.cas.psu.edu/general_information.html.

D. Trabectedin

Trabectedin (ecteinascidin-743 (ET-743); Yondelis) is derived from the Caribbean tunicate Ecteinascidia turbinacta has antitumor activity by binding to the DNA minor groove thus disrupting binding of transcription factors and inhibiting DNA synthesis.  However, it has also been shown, in myxoid liposarcoma (MLS) cells, to cause dissociation of transcription factor TLS-CHOP from promoter sequences resulting in downregulation of target genes such as CHOP, PTX3 and FN1 and induces an adipogenic differentiation program by enhancing activation of CAAT/enhancer binding protein (C/EBP) family of genes.  In MLS, TLS-CHOP sequesters C/EBPβ resulting in block of differentiation programs while trabectedin disrupts this association freeing up C/EBPβ to act as transcriptional activator of genes related to differentiation.

Ongoing Cancer Clinical Trials with HDAC Inhibitors

The following is a listing of some clinical trials using histone deacetylase inhibitors in combination with approved chemotherapeutics in various tumors.  This data was taken from the New Medicine Oncology Knowledge Base ( at http://www.nmok.net).

hdactrial1 hdactrial2

Issues and Future of Differentiation-based Therapy

In the review by Filemon Dela Cruz and Igor Matushansky(1), the authors suggest that, like days of old of cytotoxic monotherapy, differentiation therapy would not evolve as a simplistic one-size-fits –all but mirror an extremely complicated process.  Therefore they suggest three theoretical mechanisms in which differentiation therapy may occur:

  1. Cancer directed differentiation: differentiation pathways are activated without correcting the underlying oncogenic mechanisms which produced the initial differentiation block
  2. Cancer reverted differentiation: correction of the underlying oncogenic mechanism results in restoration of endogenous differentiation pathways
  3. Cancer diverted differentiation: cancer cell is redirected to an earlier stage of differentiation

Finally the authors suggest that “the potential for reversion of the malignant cancer phenotype to a more benign, or at the very least a lower grade of biological aggressiveness, may serve as a critical clinical and biologic transition of a uniformly fatal cancer into one more amenable to management or to treatment using conventional therapeutic approaches.”

References:

1.            Cruz, F. D., and Matushansky, I. (2012) Oncotarget 3, 559-567

2.            Riester, M., Stephan-Otto Attolini, C., Downey, R. J., Singer, S., and Michor, F. (2010) PLoS computational biology 6, e1000777

3.            Seidel, C., Schnekenburger, M., Dicato, M., and Diederich, M. (2012) Genes & nutrition 7, 357-367

4.            Knipstein, J., and Gore, L. (2011) Expert opinion on investigational drugs 20, 1455-1467

5.            Marks, P. A. (2007) Oncogene 26, 1351-1356

6.            Munster, P. N., Troso-Sandoval, T., Rosen, N., Rifkind, R., Marks, P. A., and Richon, V. M. (2001) Cancer research 61, 8492-8497

7.            Napoli, J. L. (1999) Biochim Biophys Acta 1440, 139-162

8.            Moon, R., Metha, R., and Rao, K. (1994) Retinoids and cancer in experimental animals. in The Retinoids: Biology, Chemistry, and Medicine (Sporn, M., Roberts, A., and Goodman, D. eds.), 2 Ed., Raven Press, New York. pp 573-596

9.            De Luca, L. M. (1991) Faseb J 5, 2924-2933

10.          Gudas, L. J. (1992) Cell Growth Differ 3, 655-662

11.          Degos, L., and Parkinson, D. (1995) Retinoids in Oncology, Springer-Verlag, Berlin

12.          Lotan, R. (1996) Faseb J 10, 1031-1039

13.          Zhang, D., Holmes, W. F., Wu, S., Soprano, D. R., and Soprano, K. J. (2000) J Cell Physiol 185, 1-20

14.          Fontana, J. A., and Rishi, A. K. (2002) Leukemia 16, 463-472

15.          Suda, D., Schwartz, J., and Shklar, G. (1986) Carcinogenesis 7, 711-715

16.          Ciaccio, M., Valenza, M., Tesoriere, L., Bongiorno, A., Albiero, R., and Livrea, M. A. (1993) Arch Biochem Biophys 302, 103-108

17.          Palacios, A., Piergiacomi, V. A., and Catala, A. (1996) Mol Cell Biochem 154, 77-82

18.          Barber, T., Borras, E., Torres, L., Garcia, C., Cabezuelo, F., Lloret, A., Pallardo, F. V., and Vina, J. R. (2000) Free Radic Biol Med 29, 1-7

19.          Borras, E., Zaragoza, R., Morante, M., Garcia, C., Gimeno, A., Lopez-Rodas, G., Barber, T., Miralles, V. J., Vina, J. R., and Torres, L. (2003) Eur J Biochem 270, 1493-1501

20.          Omenn, G. S., Goodman, G. E., Thornquist, M. D., Balmes, J., Cullen, M. R., Glass, A., Keogh, J. P., Meyskens, F. L., Jr., Valanis, B., Williams, J. H., Jr., Barnhart, S., Cherniack, M. G., Brodkin, C. A., and Hammar, S. (1996) J Natl Cancer Inst 88, 1550-1559

21.          Murata, M., and Kawanishi, S. (2000) J Biol Chem 275, 2003-2008

22.          Schwartz, J. L. (1996) J Nutr 126, 1221S-1227S

23.          Chambon, P. (1996) Faseb J 10, 940-954

24.          Freemantle, S. J., Kerley, J. S., Olsen, S. L., Gross, R. H., and Spinella, M. J. (2002) Oncogene 21, 2880-2889

25.          Collins, S. J., Robertson, K. A., and Mueller, L. (1990) Mol Cell Biol 10, 2154-2163

26.          Grunt, T. W., Somay, C., Oeller, H., Dittrich, E., and Dittrich, C. (1992) J Cell Sci 103 ( Pt 2), 501-509

27.          Lasnitzki, I. (1955) Br J Cancer 9, 434-441

28.          Moore, T. (1965) Proc Nutr Soc 24, 129-135

29.          Saffiotti, U., Montesano, R., Sellakumar, A. R., and Borg, S. A. (1967) Cancer 20, 857-864

30.          Strickland, S., and Mahdavi, V. (1978) Cell 15, 393-403

31.          Breitman, T. R., Selonick, S. E., and Collins, S. J. (1980) Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 77, 2936-2940

32.          Breitman, T. R., Collins, S. J., and Keene, B. R. (1981) Blood 57, 1000-1004

33.          Niles, R. M. (2000) Nutrition 16, 573-576

34.          Monagham, B., and Schmitt, F. (1932) J Biol Chem 96, 387-395

35.          Miller, W. H., Jr. (1998) Cancer 83, 1471-1482

36.          Miyauchi, J. (1999) Leuk Lymphoma 33, 267-280

37.          Reynolds, C. P. (2000) Curr Oncol Rep 2, 511-518

38.          Ortiz, M. A., Bayon, Y., Lopez-Hernandez, F. J., and Piedrafita, F. J. (2002) Drug Resist Updat 5, 162-175

39.          Mansure, J. J., Nassim, R., and Kassouf, W. (2009) Cancer biology & therapy 8, 6-15

40.          Osawa, E., Nakajima, A., Wada, K., Ishimine, S., Fujisawa, N., Kawamori, T., Matsuhashi, N., Kadowaki, T., Ochiai, M., Sekihara, H., and Nakagama, H. (2003) Gastroenterology 124, 361-367

41.          Stoll, B. A. (2002) Eur J Cancer Prev 11, 319-325

42.          Smith, M. R., and Kantoff, P. W. (2002) Investigational new drugs 20, 195-200

43.          Rumi, M. A., Ishihara, S., Kazumori, H., Kadowaki, Y., and Kinoshita, Y. (2004) Current medicinal chemistry. Anti-cancer agents 4, 465-477

44.          Papi, A., Guarnieri, T., Storci, G., Santini, D., Ceccarelli, C., Taffurelli, M., De Carolis, S., Avenia, N., Sanguinetti, A., Sidoni, A., Orlandi, M., and Bonafe, M. (2012) Cell death and differentiation 19, 1208-1219

Updated 4/27/2021

Epizyme’s EZH2 blocker boosts immuno-oncology response in prostate cancer models

Source: https://www.fiercebiotech.com/research/epizyme-s-ezh2-blocker-boosts-immuno-oncology-response-prostate-cancer-models

cancer cell surrounded by killer T cells
Inhibiting EZH2 either genetically or with a chemical inhibitor signaled the immune system to respond to PD-1 inhibition in prostate cancer. (NIH)

The protein EZH2 has long been known as a major driver of prostate cancer because of its ability to inactivate genes that would normally suppress tumor growth. Now, a team at Cedars-Sinai Cancer has shown in preclinical models of the disease that blocking EZH2 reduces resistance to immune-boosting checkpoint inhibitors—and they did it with the help of Epizyme, which won FDA approval for the first EZH2 blocker last year.

The Cedars-Sinai team inhibited EZH2 in preclinical prostate cancer models, activating interferon-stimulated genes in the immune system. The interferons then boosted the immune response and reversed resistance to drugs that inhibit the checkpoint PD-1, they reported in the journal Nature Cancer.

By inhibiting EZH2 either genetically or with a chemical inhibitor donated by Epizyme, the researchers used a technique called “viral mimicry” to “reopen” parts of the genome that are typically inactive, they explained in a statement. That signaled the immune system to respond to PD-1 inhibition.

Checkpoint inhibitors have been approved to treat several cancer types, but they’ve been largely disappointing in prostate cancer. Hence several research groups have been exploring combination strategies. They include the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, which published research in 2019 showing early evidence that combining checkpoint inhibition with anti-TGF-beta drug could be effective in prostate cancer.

More recently, bispecific antibodies have shown early promise in prostate cancer. Last September, Amgen presented data from a phase 1 study of AMG 160, a bispecific targeting PSMA and CD3 on T cells. The company said that 68.6% of patients experienced a decline in PSA, and eight out of 15 patients evaluated showed stable disease.

Regeneron is also developing a bispecific antibody for prostate cancer, targeting PSMA and CD28. The drug is being tested as a solo therapy and in combination with Regeneron’s PD-1 inhibitor Libtayo in a phase 1/2 clinical trial enrolling men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

As for Epizyme’s EZH2 inhibitor, Tazverik, its path to market hasn’t been perfectly smooth. An advisory committee to the FDA questioned its efficacy and safety in its initial indication, metastatic or locally advanced epithelioid sarcoma. Still, the company got the go-ahead to market the drug in adult patients with the rare cancer last January. Then the FDA added follicular lymphoma to the label in June. The drug’s takeoff has been slower than expected, however, largely because the pandemic has prevented face-to-face interactions between the sales force and physicians.

The company is currently testing Tazverik in several other cancer types, including as a combination with standard-of-care treatments in castration-resistant prostate cancer.

Other research papers on Cancer and Cancer Therapeutics were published on this Scientific Web site as follows:

Histone Deacetylase Inhibitors Induce Epithelial-to-Mesenchymal Transition in Prostate Cancer Cells

PIK3CA mutation in Colorectal Cancer may serve as a Predictive Molecular Biomarker for adjuvant Aspirin therapy

Nanotechnology Tackles Brain Cancer

Response to Multiple Cancer Drugs through Regulation of TGF-β Receptor Signaling: a MED12 Control

Personalized medicine-based cure for cancer might not be far away

GSK for Personalized Medicine using Cancer Drugs needs Alacris systems biology model to determine the in silico effect of the inhibitor in its “virtual clinical trial”

Lung Cancer (NSCLC), drug administration and nanotechnology

Non-small Cell Lung Cancer drugs – where does the Future lie?

Cancer Innovations from across the Web

arrayMap: Genomic Feature Mining of Cancer Entities of Copy Number Abnormalities (CNAs) Data

How mobile elements in “Junk” DNA promote cancer. Part 1: Transposon-mediated tumorigenesis.

Cancer Genomics – Leading the Way by Cancer Genomics Program at UC Santa Cruz

Closing the gap towards real-time, imaging-guided treatment of cancer patients.

Closing the gap towards real-time, imaging-guided treatment of cancer patients.

mRNA interference with cancer expression

Search Results for ‘cancer’ on this web site

Cancer Genomics – Leading the Way by Cancer Genomics Program at UC Santa Cruz

Closing the gap towards real-time, imaging-guided treatment of cancer patients.

Lipid Profile, Saturated Fats, Raman Spectrosopy, Cancer Cytology

mRNA interference with cancer expression

Pancreatic cancer genomes: Axon guidance pathway genes – aberrations revealed

Biomarker tool development for Early Diagnosis of Pancreatic Cancer: Van Andel Institute and Emory University

Is the Warburg Effect the cause or the effect of cancer: A 21st Century View?

Crucial role of Nitric Oxide in Cancer

Targeting Glucose Deprived Network Along with Targeted Cancer Therapy Can be a Possible Method of Treatment

Read Full Post »

UPDATED: PLATO Trial on ACS: BRILINTA (ticagrelor) better than Plavix® (clopidogrel bisulfate): Lowering chances of having another heart attack

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

 

UPDATED on 9/1/2019

Extended DAPT with Brilinta: No Benefit for Stable CAD in T2D

Substudy in those with prior PCI might identify group where bleeding tradeoff is worthwhile

PARIS — Ticagrelor (Brilinta) as part of a dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) regimen didn’t improve net outcomes for stable coronary artery disease (CAD) among type 2 diabetes patients, except perhaps in the setting of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), the THEMIS trial showed.

Adding the potent antiplatelet agent to aspirin reduced cardiovascular (CV) death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke (7.7% vs 8.5%, HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.81-0.99), reported Deepak Bhatt, MD, MPH, of Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston, at the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) congress and online in the New England Journal of Medicine.

But it also increased

  • TIMI major bleeding (2.2% vs 1.0%, HR 2.32, 95% CI 1.82-2.94) and
  • intracranial hemorrhage (0.7% vs 0.5%, HR 1.71, 95% CI 1.18- 2.48) over aspirin alone, albeit
  • without more fatal bleeding (0.2% vs 0.1%, P=0.11).

The combined effect was neutral for the exploratory composite outcome of “irreversible harm” (death from any cause, MI, stroke, fatal bleeding, or intracranial hemorrhage 10.1% vs 10.8%, HR 0.93, 95% CI 0.86-1.02).

ESC session study discussant Colin Baigent, MD, of Oxford University in England, actually calculated 12 major bleeds for every eight events prevented.

“This is a consistent story: when we add an antiplatelet agent for risk reduction, we increase the risk of bleeding,” noted Richard Kovacs, MD, of Indiana University in Indianapolis and president of the American College of Cardiology.

THEMIS is the final part of a largely-disappointing PARTHENON development program for ticagrelor, he noted. “It hasn’t changed practice. …Will the main THEMIS trial change clinical practice? In my opinion, no.”

SOURCE

https://www.medpagetoday.com/meetingcoverage/esc/81925?xid=nl_mpt_ACC_Reporter_2019-09-01&eun=g5099207d2r

 

UPDATED on 10/4/2016

Soriot’s $3.5B Brilinta dream is dashed by yet another big trial flop for AstraZeneca

by john carroll
October 4, 2016 09:00 AM EDT
Updated: 09:33 AM

Brilinta, the drug failed to demonstrate a benefit over generic Plavix (clopidogrel) for peripheral artery disease. Back in March, the heart drug flopped in a large stroke study, unable to prove that it could beat aspirin. And Soriot can chalk up those expensive studies to proving Brilinta’s serious deficiencies.

“We don’t believe the goal of $3.5 billion is attainable. I think it would be unrealistic to believe that,” Ludovic Helfgott, head of AstraZeneca’s Brilinta business, told Reuters.

Brilinta brought in a total of $619 million last year after disappointing analysts repeatedly with lower-than-expected quarterly revenue.

Heart studies aren’t cheap. AstraZeneca recruited 13,500 patients for the EUCLID study, and it had enrolled close to that number for the earlier SOCRATES trial.

SOURCE

http://endpts.com/soriots-3-5b-brilinta-dream-is-dashed-by-yet-another-big-trial-flop-for-astrazeneca/?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=75%20Dinner%20with%20Brent&utm_content=75%20Dinner%20with%20Brent+CID_8008d3b4f16d90576238cceef624d211&utm_source=ENDPOINTS%20emails&utm_term=Soriots%2035B%20Brilinta%20dream%20is%20dashed%20by%20yet%20another%20big%20trial%20flop%20for%20AstraZeneca

UPDATED on 9/4/2014

Prehospital Ticagrelor in ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction

Gilles Montalescot, M.D., Ph.D., Arnoud W. van ‘t Hof, M.D., Ph.D., Frédéric Lapostolle, M.D., Ph.D., Johanne Silvain, M.D., Ph.D., Jens Flensted Lassen, M.D., Ph.D., Leonardo Bolognese, M.D., Warren J. Cantor, M.D., Ángel Cequier, M.D., Ph.D., Mohamed Chettibi, M.D., Ph.D., Shaun G. Goodman, M.D., Christopher J. Hammett, M.B., Ch.B., M.D., Kurt Huber, M.D., Magnus Janzon, M.D., Ph.D., Béla Merkely, M.D., Ph.D., Robert F. Storey, M.D., D.M., Uwe Zeymer, M.D., Olivier Stibbe, M.D., Patrick Ecollan, M.D., Wim M.J.M. Heutz, M.D., Eva Swahn, M.D., Ph.D., Jean-Philippe Collet, M.D., Ph.D., Frank F. Willems, M.D., Ph.D., Caroline Baradat, M.Sc., Muriel Licour, M.Sc., Anne Tsatsaris, M.D., Eric Vicaut, M.D., Ph.D., and Christian W. Hamm, M.D., Ph.D. for the ATLANTIC Investigators

September 1, 2014DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1407024

BACKGROUND

The direct-acting platelet P2Y12 receptor antagonist ticagrelor can reduce the incidence of major adverse cardiovascular events when administered at hospital admission to patients with ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Whether prehospital administration of ticagrelor can improve coronary reperfusion and the clinical outcome is unknown.

METHODS

We conducted an international, multicenter, randomized, double-blind study involving 1862 patients with ongoing STEMI of less than 6 hours’ duration, comparing prehospital (in the ambulance) versus in-hospital (in the catheterization laboratory) treatment with ticagrelor. The coprimary end points were the proportion of patients who did not have a 70% or greater resolution of ST-segment elevation before percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) and the proportion of patients who did not have Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction flow grade 3 in the infarct-related artery at initial angiography. Secondary end points included the rates of major adverse cardiovascular events and definite stent thrombosis at 30 days.

RESULTS

The median time from randomization to angiography was 48 minutes, and the median time difference between the two treatment strategies was 31 minutes. The two coprimary end points did not differ significantly between the prehospital and in-hospital groups. The absence of ST-segment elevation resolution of 70% or greater after PCI (a secondary end point) was reported for 42.5% and 47.5% of the patients, respectively. The rates of major adverse cardiovascular events did not differ significantly between the two study groups. The rates of definite stent thrombosis were lower in the prehospital group than in the in-hospital group (0% vs. 0.8% in the first 24 hours; 0.2% vs. 1.2% at 30 days). Rates of major bleeding events were low and virtually identical in the two groups, regardless of the bleeding definition used.

CONCLUSIONS

Prehospital administration of ticagrelor in patients with acute STEMI appeared to be safe but did not improve pre-PCI coronary reperfusion. (Funded by AstraZeneca; ATLANTIC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01347580.)

SOURCE

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1407024?query=TOC

 

 

UPDATED on 2/7/2014

PLATO Controversy Hits the Wall Street Journal

February 05, 2014

NEW YORK, NY – The controversy surrounding the PLATOtrial of ticagrelor (Brilinta, AstraZeneca) continues unabated, according to a story published in the Wall Street Journal. Specifically, a sealed complaint filed in US district court in the District of Columbia by a researcher contends that the cardiovascular events in the study “may have been manipulated” [1].

Dr Victor Serebruany (HeartDrug Research Laboratories, Johns Hopkins University, Towson, MD), who has long been a thorn in the side of AstraZeneca and the PLATO investigators, filed the complaint under the False Claims Act, reports theWall Street Journal. The Journal notes that the US attorney’s office in Washington, DC, has contacted Serebruany and is currently investigating the clinical trial.As reported by heartwirein October 2013, the US Department of Justice issued a civil investigative demand from its civil division “seeking documents and information regarding PLATO.” AstraZeneca is complying with the request.

First reported by heart wirein 2009 , the PLATO trial was a positive study involving more 18 000 patients from 43 countries. PLATO investigators, led by Dr Lars Wallentin (Uppsala Clinical Research Center, Sweden), showed that treating acute coronary syndrome patients with ticagrelor significantly reduced the rate of MI, stroke, and cardiovascular death compared with patients taking clopidogrel. Results were presented at the European Society of Cardiology 2009 Congress and reported in the New England Journal of Medicine.

PLATO has been dogged by questions, including prior to approval. In the sealed complaint, Serebruany takes issue with a number of things, many of which have been reported previously. He alleges that the

  • number of clinical events among those taking clopidogrel was high compared with other studies, pointing out that the rate of all-cause death was 5.9% among clopidogrel-treated patients—nearly twice as high as earlier studies. In addition,
  • the sealed complaint documents the geographic discrepancies in the trial, noting there was a trend toward worse outcomes with ticagrelor at North American sites.The complaint also alleges that
  • an initial count of clinical events suggested the two drugs were equivalent, but adjudication by the Duke Clinical Research Institute attributed another 45 MIs to the clopidogrel group, which tipped the results in favor of ticagrelor. Other questions raised about the study include
  • site monitoring and timing of clinical events. Serebruany also alleges that
  • the trial may have unintentionally been unblinded because of the shape of clopidogrel’s “split capsules,” which would have enabled doctors and nurses to know which drug patients received.

AstraZeneca rebutted these issues, telling the Journal that it is cooperating with the government. It said it is confident in the integrity of the trial and noted the overall study showed the superiority of ticagrelor over clopidogrel. There is no evidence the trial was unblinded and researchers used the same standards when qualifying all clinical events, including MIs, they noted. In addition, the company said it is not possible to compare event rates with clopidogrel in PLATO with other studies because the patient populations differ.

The Journal reports that Serebruany became embroiled in the controversy when asked by the FDA‘s Dr Thomas Marciniak to advise the agency about the PLATO data in 2010. Marciniak, who led the FDA’s review of PLATO, called AstraZeneca’s submission on serious adverse events the “worst submission” he ever encountered. According to the submission, he noted, 12 patients reported their own deaths by telephone. Before approving ticagrelor, the FDA requested an additional analysis of PLATO, and it was eventually approved in the US in July 2011. Ticagrelor was approved in Europe in December 2010 and is authorized for use in more than 100 countries.

The Journal called Serebruany an expert in the antiplatelet field but said he is a “controversial figure,” partly because of his financial ties to industry and repeated criticisms of new drug approvals. Through HeartDrug Research, Serebruany has worked on prasugrel (Effient, Lily/Daiichi-Sankyo), a competing antiplatelet agent, but has also done work for AstraZeneca.

REFERENCE

Burton TM. Doctor challenges testing of AstraZeneca’s Brilinta. Wall Street Journal, February 2, 2014. Available here.

SOURCE

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/820236?nlid=47583_1984&src=wnl_edit_medn_card&uac=93761AJ&spon=2

UPDATED 3/28/2013

How AstraZeneca Will Use A Diagnostic To Market Its Blood Thinner

by Matthew Harper, Forbes Staff on 3/21/2013

Earlier today I wrote about how AstraZeneca is telling investors that its blood-thinner Brilinta, used to prevent second heart attacks, could be a multi-billion dollar drug, at least twice as big as Wall Street analysts expect. So far the drug has been a disappointment.

I wrote:

Another key data point Astra presented was that blood levels of troponin, a muscle protein released by the heart during a heart attack, predict which patients get the most benefit from Brilinta. This data is not in AstraZeneca’s label, but a spokeswoman said that she believed it would be something the company can market to doctors.

via Can Pascal Soriot Turn Around AstraZeneca? It May Come Down To One Drug – Forbes.

But will the Food and Drug Administration allow Astra to tell doctors that? Stratification using troponin is not in Brilinta’s FDA-approved label, and off-label promotion is illegal. But Ferguson says that communications about troponin will be allowed because all patients with high troponin are patients who would be included in the FDA-approved indication. He confirms that use of troponin testing will be part of the new marketing plan for Brilinta.

SOURCE:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2013/03/21/how-astrazeneca-will-use-a-diagnostic-to-market-its-blood-thinner/

Can Pascal Soriot Turn Around AstraZeneca? It May Come Down To One Drug

by Matthew Herper, Forbes Staff on 3/21/2013

This morning in New York, new AstraZeneca chief executive Pascal Soriot is telling investors how he is going to turn around the company that has had the absolute worst track record in research and development among any big pharmaceutical firm. The plan is fairly wide-ranging and involves a lot of the steps one might expect:

  • new layoffs (2,300 jobs);
  • a re-focusing of research and development on three areas: heart disease and diabetes; oncology; and respiratory and inflammation;
  • new R&D initiatives involving Moderna, a biotech company, and the Karolinska Instutet;
  • moving the company’s headquarters to its R&D hub in Cambridge, U.K.;
  • re-focusing on emerging markets, where AZ already gets $6 billion in sales, especially China.

But the short-term key to delivering on his promises today seems to come down to a single drug: Brilinta, the Plavix competitor thatAstraZeneca introduced in 2011 which has so far disappointed, generating  just $324 $89 million in global sales last year. This is a medicine to prevent heart attacks and strokes in patients who suffer acute coronary syndrome, the condition that occurs after a heart attack or serious heart-related chest pain. It works by preventing the formation of blood clots.

Plavix was the second biggest drug in the world, with $6 billion in annual sales, but it is now generic. The conventional wisdom is that it will be difficult to compete with cheap generics. Brilinta is actually trailing Effient, a similar medicine from Eli Lilly, in usage. Wall Street consensus currently sees Brilinta growing to become a moderate-sized drug in 2018, with $1.3 billion in annual sales. But AstraZeneca is saying that it thinks Brilinta can be a multi-billion dollar product. Astra has confirmed that this means Brilinta will have to surpass Effient. The newer drugs also cause more bleeding than Plavix.

What is the company’s argument? In his presentation today, Paul Hudson, Astra’s Executive Vice President, North America, said that the key would be focusing on one key fact: Brilinta reduced cardiovascular deaths by 21% compared to Plavix in a big clinical trial. That would mean that if everyone eligible for Brilinta got it, 100,000 lives would be saved.

But the reality is that doctors have been skeptical of that data because in the part of that trial that was run in North America, the benefit was less clear. AstraZeneca says that this may have been due to an interaction of Brilinta and aspirin and that, according to current cardiovascular guidelines, doctors should be prescribing less aspirin anyway.

Another key data point Astra presented was that blood levels of troponin, a muscle protein released by the heart during a heart attack, predict which patients get the most benefit from Brilinta. This data is not in AstraZeneca’s label, but a spokeswoman said that she believed it would be something the company can market to doctors.

A lot of what Astra will do in the short term on Brilinta will be blocking and tackling. It needs to pay bigger rebates to insurers to make sure that patients can get cheap access to the drug. (This is how discounts happen in the American insurance system: the patient pays a co-payment and the insurer pays full price for the drug, but then the drug maker gives the insurer money back to make the end cost cheaper.) It will also be doing a lot of medical marketing, involving its internal experts or paid, external doctors, to get the word out about the benefits of Brilinta.

Brilinta has other advantages (it stops acting quickly) and disadvantages (it must be given twice a day). But the other big question for expanding results is whether large clinical trials that are now ongoing will show that it works in a broader array of heart patients. Astra is starting a big trial to show Brilinta prevents strokes. These trials are risky and expensive, but there will be a big payoff if they work.

Astra has some other commercial levers to point to. It’s diabetes pill Onglyza, which is sold with Bristol-Myers Squibb, will have results in a big study of its efficacy in preventing heart disease before a similar study of Merck’s top-selling Januvia, which started first. Soriot has smart ideas about which drugs to advance into later testing. But Brilinta is going to be the biggest single indicator of whether Soriot’s new strategies are paying off.

SOURCE:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewherper/2013/03/21/can-pascal-soriot-turn-around-astrazeneca-it-may-come-down-to-one-drug/

BRILINTA is an antiplatelet medication

Taking BRILINTA is a first step in the treatment your physician has chosen for you. At BRILINTA.com, you will find helpful information and useful learning tools to help you complete your course of BRILINTA therapy. Make sure you and your loved ones read through all of the sections.

What is BRILINTA?

BRILINTA is a type of prescription antiplatelet medication for people who have had a recent heart attack or severe chest pain that happened because their heart wasn’t getting enough oxygen and who are being treated with medicines or procedures to open blocked arteries in the heart. BRILINTA is used with aspirin to stop platelets from sticking together and forming a blood clot that could block blood flow to the heart and cause another, possibly fatal, heart attack. Platelets are small cells in the blood that help with normal blood clotting.

Take BRILINTA and aspirin exactly as instructed by your doctor: BRILINTA twice a day, plus one 81-mg aspirin tablet once a day. You should not take a dose of aspirin higher than 100 mg each day because it can affect how well BRILINTA works. Tell your doctor about any medicines you are taking that contain aspirin. Do not take any new medicines that contain aspirin.

Why BRILINTA?

BRILINTA used with aspirin lowers your chance of having another serious problem with your heart or blood vessels such as heart attack, stroke, or blood clots in your stent if you received one. These can be fatal. In fact, in a large clinical study BRILINTA was even better than Plavix® (clopidogrel bisulfate) tablets at lowering your chances of having another heart attack.

BRILINTA is used to lower your chance of having another heart attack or dying from a heart attack, but BRILINTA (and similar drugs) can cause bleeding that can be serious and sometimes lead to death.

Complete the
Course
 Program

IMPORTANT SAFETY INFORMATION ABOUT BRILINTA

BRILINTA is used to lower your chance of having another heart attack or dying from a heart attack or stroke, but BRILINTA (and similar drugs) can cause bleeding that can be serious and sometimes lead to death. Instances of serious bleeding, such as internal bleeding, may require blood transfusions or surgery. While you take BRILINTA, you may bruise and bleed more easily and be more likely to have nosebleeds. Bleeding will also take longer than usual to stop.

Call your doctor right away if you have any signs or symptoms of bleeding while taking BRILINTA, including: severe, uncontrollable bleeding; pink, red, or brown urine; vomit that is bloody or looks like coffee grounds; red or black stool; or if you cough up blood or blood clots.

Do not stop taking BRILINTA without talking to the doctor who prescribes it for you. People who are treated with a stent, and stop taking BRILINTA too soon, have a higher risk of getting a blood clot in the stent, having a heart attack, or dying. If you stop BRILINTA because of bleeding, or for other reasons, your risk of a heart attack or stroke may increase. Tell all your doctors and dentists that you are taking BRILINTA. To decrease your risk of bleeding, your doctor may instruct you to stop taking BRILINTA 5 days before you have elective surgery. Your doctor should tell you when to start taking BRILINTA again, as soon as possible after surgery.

Take BRILINTA and aspirin exactly as instructed by your doctor. You should not take a dose of aspirin higher than 100 mg daily because it can affect how well BRILINTA works. Tell your doctor if you take other medicines that contain aspirin. Do not take new medicines that contain aspirin.

Do not take BRILINTA if you are bleeding now, especially from your stomach or intestine (ulcer), have a history of bleeding in the brain, or have severe liver problems.

BRILINTA can cause serious side effects, including bleeding and shortness of breath. Call your doctor if you have new or unexpected shortness of breath or any side effect that bothers you or that does not go away. Your doctor can decide what treatment is needed.

Tell your doctor about all the medicines you take, including prescription and nonprescription medicines, vitamins, and herbal supplements. BRILINTA may affect the way other medicines work, and other medicines may affect how BRILINTA works.

Approved uses
BRILINTA is a prescription medicine for people who have had a recent heart attack or severe chest pain that happened because their heart wasn’t getting enough oxygen and who are being treated with medicines or procedures to open blocked arteries in the heart.

BRILINTA is used with aspirin to lower your chance of having another serious problem with your heart or blood vessels such as heart attack, stroke, or blood clots in your stent if you received one. These can be fatal.

Please read Prescribing Information, including Boxed WARNINGS.

Please read Medication Guide.

You are encouraged to report negative side effects of prescription drugs to the FDA. Visit www.fda.gov/medwatch or call 1-800-FDA-1088.

If you are without prescription coverage and cannot afford your medication, AstraZeneca may be able to help. For more information, please visit www.AstraZeneca.com.

This product information is intended for US consumers only.

BRILINTA is a trademark of the AstraZeneca group of companies.

Plavix® is a registered trademark of sanofi-aventis.

©2012 AstraZeneca.706809-1789005 8/12

SOURCE:

http://www.brilinta.com/antiplatelet-prescription-medication.aspx#au

http://www1.astrazeneca-us.com/pi/brilinta.pdf

BRILINTA (ticagrelor)

Ticagrelor (trade name Brilinta in the US, Brilique and Possia in the EU) is a platelet aggregation inhibitor produced by AstraZeneca. The drug was approved for use in the European Union by the European Commission on December 3, 2010.[1][2] The drug was approved by the US Food and Drug Administrationon July 20, 2011.[3]

Indications

Ticagrelor is indicated for the prevention of thrombotic events (for example stroke or heart attack) in patients with acute coronary syndrome or myocardial infarction with ST elevation. The drug is combined with acetylsalicylic acid unless the latter is contraindicated.[4] Treatment of acute coronary syndrome with ticagrelor as compared with clopidogrel significantly reduces the rate of death.[5]

Contraindications

Contraindications for ticagrelor are: active pathological bleeding and a history of intracranial bleeding, as well as reduced liver function and combination with drugs that strongly influence activity of the liver enzymeCYP3A4, because the drug is metabolized via CYP3A4 and excreted via the liver.[4]

Adverse effects

The most common side effects are shortness of breath (dyspnea, 14%)[6] and various types of bleeding, such as hematomanosebleedgastrointestinalsubcutaneous or dermal bleeding. Allergic skin reactions such as rash and itching have been observed in less than 1% of patients.[4]

Physical and chemical properties

Ticagrelor is a nucleoside analogue: the cyclopentane ring is similar to the sugar ribose, and the nitrogen rich aromatic ring system resembles the nucleobase purine, giving the molecule an overall similarity toadenosine. The substance has low solubility and low permeability under the Biopharmaceutics Classification System.[1]

Ticagrelor as a nucleoside analogue

The nucleoside adenosinefor comparison

Pharmacokinetics

Ticagrelor is absorbed quickly from the gut, the bioavailability being 36%, and reaches its peak concentration after about 1.5 hours. The main metabolite, AR-C124910XX, is formed quickly via CYP3A4 by de-hydroxyethylation at position 5 of the cyclopentane ring.[7] It peaks after about 2.5 hours. Both ticagrelor and AR-C124910XX are bound to plasma proteins (>99.7%), and both are pharmacologically active. Blood plasma concentrations are linearly dependent on the dose up to 1260 mg (the sevenfold daily dose). The metabolite reaches 30–40% of ticagrelor’s plasma concentrations. Drug and metabolite are mainly excreted via bile and feces.

Plasma concentrations of ticagrelor are slightly increased (12–23%) in elderly patients, women, patients of Asian ethnicity, and patients with mild hepatic impairment. They are decreased in patients that described themselves as ‘coloured’ and such with severe renal impairment. These differences are considered clinically irrelevant. In Japanese people, concentrations are 40% higher than in Caucasians, or 20% after body weight correction. The drug has not been tested in patients with severe hepatic impairment.[4]

Mechanism of action

Like the thienopyridines prasugrelclopidogrel and ticlopidine, ticagrelor blocks adenosine diphosphate (ADP) receptors of subtype P2Y12. In contrast to the other antiplatelet drugs, ticagrelor has a binding site different from ADP, making it an allosteric antagonist, and the blockage is reversible.[8] Moreover, the drug does not need hepatic activation, which might work better for patients with genetic variants regarding the enzyme CYP2C19 (although it is not certain whether clopidogrel is significantly influenced by such variants).[9][10][11]

Comparison with clopidogrel

The PLATO trial, funded by AstraZeneca, in mid-2009 found that ticagrelor had better mortality rates than clopidogrel (9.8% vs. 11.7%, p<0.001) in treating patients with acute coronary syndrome. Patients given ticagrelor were less likely to die from vascular causes, heart attack, or stroke but had greater chances of non-lethal bleeding (16.1% vs. 14.6%, p=0.0084), higher rate of major bleeding not related to coronary-artery bypass grafting (4.5% vs. 3.8%, P=0.03), including more instances of fatal intracranial bleeding. Rates of major bleeding were not different. Discontinuation of the study drug due to adverse events occurred more frequently with ticagrelor than with clopidogrel (in 7.4% of patients vs. 6.0%, P<0.001)[5] The PLATO trial showed a statistically insignificant trend toward worse outcomes with ticagrelor versus clopidogrel among US patients in the study – who comprised 1800 of the total 18,624 patients. The HR actually reversed for the composite end point cardiovascular (death, MI, or stroke): 12.6% for patients given ticagrelor and 10.1% for patients given clopidogrel (HR = 1.27). Some believe the results could be due to differences in aspirin maintenance doses, which are higher in the United States.[12] Others state that the central adjudicating committees found an extra 45 MIs in the clopidogrel (comparator) arm but none in the ticagrelor arm, which improved the MI outcomes with ticagrelor. Without this adjudication the trials’ primary efficacy outcomes should not be significant[13]

Consistently with its reversible mode of action, ticagrelor is known to act faster and shorter than clopidogrel.[14] This means it has to be taken twice instead of once a day which is a disadvantage in respect of compliance, but its effects are more quickly reversible which can be useful before surgery or if side effects occur.[4][15]

Interactions

Inhibitors of the liver enzyme CYP3A4, such as ketoconazole and possibly grapefruit juice, increase blood plasma levels and consequently can lead to bleeding and other adverse effects. Conversely, drugs that are metabolized by CYP3A4, for example simvastatin, show increased plasma levels and more side effects if combined with ticagrelor. CYP3A4 inductors, for example rifampicin and possibly St. John’s wort, can reduce the effectiveness of ticagrelor. There is no evidence for interactions via CYP2C9.

The drug also inhibits P-glycoprotein (P-gp), leading to increased plasma levels of digoxinciclosporin and other P-gp substrates. Ticagrelor and AR-C124910XX levels are not significantly influenced by P-gp inhibitors.[4]

In the US a boxed warning states that use of ticagrelor with aspirin doses exceeding 100 mg/day decreases the effectiveness of the medication.[16]

References

  1. a b “Assessment Report for Brilique”European Medicines Agency. January 2011.
  2. ^ European Public Assessment Report Possia
  3. ^ “FDA approves blood-thinning drug Brilinta to treat acute coronary syndromes”. FDA. 20 July 2011.
  4. a b c d e f Haberfeld, H, ed. (2010) (in German). Austria-Codex (2010/2011 ed.). Vienna: Österreichischer Apothekerverlag.
  5. a b Wallentin, Lars; Becker, RC; Budaj, A; Cannon, CP; Emanuelsson, H; Held, C; Horrow, J; Husted, S et al. (August 30, 2009). “Ticagrelor versus Clopidogrel in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndromes”NEJM 361 (11): 1045–57. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa0904327PMID 19717846.
  6. ^ Brilinta: Highlights of prescribing information
  7. ^ Teng, R; Oliver, S; Hayes, MA; Butler, K (2010). “Absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion of ticagrelor in healthy subjects”. Drug metabolism and disposition: the biological fate of chemicals 38 (9): 1514–21. doi:10.1124/dmd.110.032250PMID 20551239.
  8. ^ Birkeland, Kade; Parra, David; Rosenstein, Robert (2010). “Antiplatelet therapy in acute coronary syndromes: focus on ticagrelor”Journal of Blood Medicine 1: 197–219.
  9. ^ H. Spreitzer (February 4, 2008). “Neue Wirkstoffe – AZD6140” (in German). Österreichische Apothekerzeitung (3/2008): 135.
  10. ^ Owen, RT, Serradell, N, Bolos, J (2007). “AZD6140”. Drugs of the Future 32 (10): 845–853. doi:10.1358/dof.2007.032.10.1133832.
  11. ^ Tantry, Udaya S; Bliden, Kevin P (2010). “First Analysis of the Relation Between CYP2C19 Genotype and Pharmacodynamics in Patients Treated With Ticagrelor Versus Clopidogrel”. Circulation: Cardiovascular Genetics 3: 556–566. doi:10.1161/CIRCGENETICS.110.958561.
  12. ^ Bernardo Lombo, José G Díez. Ticagrelor: the evidence for its clinical potential as an oral antiplatelet treatment for the reduction of major adverse cardiac events in patients with acute coronary syndromes Core Evid. 2011; 6: 31–42. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3065559/
  13. ^ Serebruany VL, Atar D. Viewpoint: Central adjudication of myocardial infarction in outcome-driven clinical trials—Common patterns in TRITON, RECORD, and PLATO? Thromb Haemost 2012; DOI: 10.1160/TH12-04-0251. http://www.theheart.org/article/1433145/print.do
  14. ^ Miller, R (24 February 2010). “Is there too much excitement for ticagrelor?”. TheHeart.org.
  15. ^ H. Spreitzer (17 January 2011). “Neue Wirkstoffe – Elinogrel” (in German). Österreichische Apothekerzeitung (2/2011): 10.
  16. ^ July 20, 2011 AstraZeneca: Ticagrelor (Brilinta) Gains FDA Approval Larry Husten cardiobrief.org/2011/07/20/astrazeneca-ticagrelor-brilinta-gains-fda-approval/

SOURCE:

 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ticagrelor

Read Full Post »

Nanotechnology and HIV/AIDS Treatment

Author: Tilda Barliya, PhD

 

AIDS was first reported in 1981 followed by the identification of HIV as the cause of the disease in 1983 and is now a global pandemic that has become the leading infectious killer of adults worldwide. By 2006, more than 65 million people had been infected with the HIV virus worldwide and 25 million had died of AIDS (Merson MH. The HIV-AIDS pandemic at 25 – the global response. (1, 2). This has caused tremendous social and economic damage worldwide, with developing countries, particularly Sub-Saharan Africa, heavily affected.

A cure for HIV/AIDS has been elusive in almost 30 years of research. Early treatments focused on antiretroviral drugs that were effective only to a certain degree. The first drug, zidovudine, was approved by the US FDA in 1987, leading to the approval of a total of 25 drugs to date, many of which are also available in fixed-dose combinations and generic formulations for use in resource-limited settings (to date, only zidovudine and didanosine are available as true generics in the USA).

However, it was the advent of a class of drugs known as protease inhibitors and the introduction of triple-drug therapy in the mid-1990s that revolutionized HIV/AIDS treatment (3,4). This launched the era of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART), where a combination of three or more different classes of drugs are administered simultaneously.

Challenges of HIV/AIDS treatment

  • HIV resides in latent cellular and anatomical reservoirs where current drugs are unable to completely eradicate the virus.
  • Macrophages are major cellular reservoirs, which also contribute to the generation of elusive mutant viral genotypes by serving as the host for viral genetic recombination.
  • Anatomical latent reservoirs include secondary lymphoid tissue, testes, liver, kidney, lungs, the gut and the brain.
  • The major challenge facing current drug regimens is that they do not fully eramacrdicate the virus from these reservoirs; requiring patients take medications for life. Under current treatment, pills are taken daily, resulting in problems of patient adherence. The drugs also have side effects and in some people the virus develops resistance against certain drugs.

Current treatment in HIV/AIDS

The use of the HAART regimen, particularly in the developed world, has resulted in tremendous success in improving the expectancy and quality of lives for patients. However, some HAART regimens have serious side effects and, in all cases, HAART has to be taken for a lifetime, with daily dosing of one or more pills. Due to the need to take the medication daily for a lifetime, patients fail to adhere to the treatment schedule, leading to ineffective drug levels in the body and rebound of viral replication.Some patients also develop resistance to certain combinations of drugs, resulting in failure of the treatment. The absence of complete cure under current treatment underscores the great need for continued efforts in seeking innovative approaches for treatment of HIV/AIDS.

Drug resistance is mainly caused by the high genetic diversity of HIV-1 and the continuous mutation it undergoes. This problem is being addressed with individualized therapy, whereby resistance testing is performed to select a combination of drugs that is most effective for each patient (5). In addition, side effects due to toxicities of the drugs are also a concern. There are reports that patients taking HAART experience increased rates of heart disease, diabetes, liver disease, cancer and accelerated aging. Most experts agree that these effects could be due to the HIV infection itself or co-infection with another virus, such as co-infection with hepatitis C virus resulting in liver disease. However, the toxicities resulting from the drugs used in HAART could also contribute to these effects.

Under current treatment, complete eradication of the virus from the body has not been possible. The major cause for this is that the virus resides in ‘latent reservoirs’ within memory CD4+ T cells and cells of the macrophage–monocyte lineage. A major study recently found that, in addition to acting as latent reservoirs, macrophages significantly contribute to the generation of elusive mutant viral genotypes by serving as the host for viral genetic recombination (6).  The cells that harbor latent HIV are typically concentrated in specific anatomic sites, such as secondary lymphoid tissue, testes, liver, kidney, lungs, gut and the CNS. The eradication of the virus from such reservoirs is critical to the effective long-term treatment of HIV/AIDS patients.

Therefore, there is a great need to explore new approaches for developing nontoxic, lower-dosage treatment modalities that provide more sustained dosing coverage and effectively eradicate the virus from the reservoirs, avoiding the need for lifetime treatments.

Nanotechnology for HIV/AIDS treatment

The use of nanotechnology platforms for delivery of drugs is revolutionizing medicine in many areas of disease treatment.

Nanotechnology-based platforms for systemic delivery of antiretroviral drugs could have similar advantages.

  • Controlled-release delivery systems can enhance their half-lives, keeping them in circulation at therapeutic concentrations for longer periods of time. This could have major implications in improving adherence to the drugs.
  • Nanoscale delivery systems also enhance and modulate the distribution of hydrophobic and hydrophilic drugs into and within different tissues due to their small size. This particular feature of nanoscale delivery systems appears to hold the most promise for their use in clinical treatment and prevention of HIV. Specifically, targeted delivery of antiretroviral drugs to CD4+ T cells and macrophages as well as delivery to the brain and other organ systems could ensure that drugs reach latent reservoirs
  • Moreover, by controlling the release profiles of the delivery systems, drugs could be released over a longer time and at higher effective doses to the specific targets. Figure 1. Various nanoscale drug delivery systems.

Optional treatments:

  •    Antiretroviral drugs
  •    Gene Therapy
  •    Immune Therapy
  •    Prevention

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.Object name is nihms180336f1.jpg Object name is nihms180336f1.jpg

The use of nanotechnology systems for delivery of antiretroviral drugs has been extensively reviewed by Nowacek et al. and Amiji et al. (7,8).

In a recent study based on polymeric systems, nanosuspensions (200 nm) of the drug rilpivirine (TMC278) stabilized by polyethylene. A series of experiments by Dou et al. showed that nanosuspension of the drug indinavir can be stabilized by a surfactant system comprised of Lipoid E80 for effective delivery to various tissues. The indinavir nanosuspensions were loaded into macrophages and their uptake was investigated. Macrophages loaded with indinavir nanosuspensions were then injected intravenously into mice, resulting in a high distribution in the lungs, liver and spleen. More significantly, the intravenous administration of a single dose of the nanoparticle-loaded macrophages in a rodent mouse model of HIV brain infection resulted in significant antiviral activity in the brain and produced measureable drug levels in the blood up to 14 days post-treatment.polypropylene glycol (poloxamer 338) and PEGylated tocopheryl succinate ester (TPGS 1000) were studied in dogs and mice. A single-dose administration of the drug in nanosuspensions resulted in sustained release over 3 months in dogs and 3 weeks in mice, compared with a half-life of 38 h for free drug. These results serve as a proof-of-concept that nanoscale drug delivery may potentially lower dosing frequency and improve adherence.

Active targeting strategies have also been employed for antiretroviral drug delivery. Macrophages, which are the major HIV reservoir cells, have various receptors on their surface such as formyl peptide, mannose, galactose and Fc receptors, which could be utilized for receptor-mediated internalization. The drug stavudine was encapsulated using various liposomes (120–200 nm) conjugated with mannose and galactose, resulting in increased cellular uptake compared with free drug or plain liposomes, and generating significant level of the drug in liver, spleen and lungs. Stavudine is a water-soluble drug with a very short serum half-life (1 h). Hence, the increased cellular uptake and sustained release in the tissues afforded by targeted liposomes is a major improvement compared with free drug. The drug zidovudine, with half-life of 1 h and low solubility, was also encapsulated in a mannose-targeted liposome made from stearylamine, showing increased localization in lymph node and spleen. An important factor to consider here is that although most of the nucleoside drugs such as stavudine and zidovudine have short serum half-lives, the clinically relevant half-life is that of the intracellular triphosphate form of the drug. For example, despite zidovudine’s 1 h half-life in plasma, it is dosed twice daily based on intracellular pharmacokinetic and clinical efficacy data. Therefore, future nanotechnology-based delivery systems will have to focus in showing significant increase of the half-lives of the encapsulated drugs to achieve a less frequent dosing such as once weekly, once-monthly or even less.

Gene Therapy for HIV/AIDS

In addition to improving existing antiretroviral therapy, there are ongoing efforts to discover alternative approaches for treatment of HIV/AIDS. One promising alternative approach is gene therapy, in which a gene is inserted into a cell to interfere with viral infection or replication. Other nucleic acid-based compounds, such as DNA, siRNA, RNA decoys, ribozymes and aptamers or protein-based agents such as fusion inhibitors and zinc-finger nucleases can also be used to interfere with viral replication.

An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.Object name is nihms180336f2.jpg Object name is nihms180336f2.jpg

RNAi is also considered to have therapeutic potential for HIV/AIDS. Gene silencing is induced by double stranded siRNA, which targets for destruction

he mRNA of the gene of interest. For HIV/AIDS, RNAi can either target the various stages of the viral replication cycle or various cellular targets involved in viral infection such as CD4, CCR5, and/or CXCR4, the major cell surface co-receptors responsible for viral entry. HIV replicates by reverse transcription to form DNA and uses the DNA to produce copies of its mRNA for protein synthesis; siRNA therapy could be used to knock down this viral mRNA. As with other gene therapy techniques, delivery of siRNA to specific cells and tissues has been the major challenge in realizing the potential of RNAi.

New nanotechnology platforms are tackling this problem by providing nonviral alternatives for effective and safe delivery. The first nontargeted delivery of siRNA in humans via self-assembling, cyclodextrin polymer-based nanoparticles for cancer treatment have recently entered Phase I clinical trials.

Although at an early stage, nonviral delivery of siRNA for treatment of HIV infection is also gaining ground. A fusion protein, with a peptide transduction domain and a double stranded RNA-binding domain, was used to encapsulate and deliver siRNA to T cells in vivo. CD4- and CD8-specific siRNA delivery caused RNAi responses with no adverse effects such as cyto-toxicity or immune stimulation. Similarly, a protamine-antibody fusion protein-based siRNA delivery demonstrated that siRNA knockdown of the gag gene can inhibit HIV replication in primary T cells

Single-walled nanotubes were shown to deliver CXCR4 and CD4 specific siRNA to human T cells and peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Up to 90% knockdown of CXCR4 receptors and up to 60% knockdown of CD4 expression on T cells was observed while the knockdown of CXCR4 receptors on peripheral blood mononuclear cells was as high as 60%. In a separate study, amino-terminated carbosilane dendrimers (with interior carbon-silicon bonds) were used for delivery of siRNA to HIV-infected lymphocytes.

These pioneering studies demonstrate that nonviral siRNA delivery is possible for HIV/AIDS treatment. However, more work needs to be done in optimizing the delivery systems and utilizing designs for efficient targeting and intracellular delivery. The recent developments in polymer- and liposome-based siRNA delivery systems could be optimized for targeting cells that are infected with HIV, such as T cells and macrophages. Moreover, since HIV mutates and has multiple strains with different genetic sequences, combination siRNA therapy targeting multiple genes should be pursued. For these applications, nanotechnology platforms with capability for co-delivery and targeting need to be developed specifically for HIV-susceptible cells. A macrophage and T-cell-targeted and nanotechnology-based combination gene therapy may be a promising platform for efficient HIV/AIDS treatment.

Immunotherapy for HIV/AIDS

The various treatment approaches described above focus on treating HIV/AIDS by directly targeting HIV at the level of the host cell or the virus itself. An alternative approach is immunotherapy aimed at modulating the immune response against HIV. CD8+ cytotoxic T-cell responses to acute HIV infection appear to be relatively normal, while neutralizing antibody production by B cells is delayed or even absent.

Immunotherapy is a treatment approach involving the use of immunomodulatory agents to modulate the immune response against a disease. Similar to vaccines, it is based on immunization of individuals with various immunologic formulations; however, the purpose is to treat HIV-infected patients as opposed to protect healthy individuals (preventive vaccines will be discussed in an upcoming section). The various immunotherapy approaches for HIV/AIDS could be based on delivering cytokines (such as IL-2, IL-7 and IL-15) or antigens. The development of cellular immunity, and to a large degree humoral immunity, requires antigen-presenting cells (APCs) to process and present antigens to CD4+and CD8+ T cells. Dendritic cells (DCs) are the quintessential professional APCs responsible for initiating and orchestrating the development of cellular and humoral (antibody) immunity.

Various polymeric systems have been explored for in vivo targeting of DCs and delivery of small molecules, proteins or DNAs showing potential for immunotherapy. Poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) stabilized poly(propylene sulfide) polymer nanoparticles accumulated in DCs in lymph nodes. Following nanoparticle injection, DCs containing nanoparticles accumulated in lymph nodes, peaking at 4 days with 40–50% of DCs and other APCs having internalized nanoparticles.

In another study, nanoparticles of the copolymer poly(D,L-lacticide-co-glycolide) (PLGA) showed efficient delivery of antigens to murine bone marrow-derived DCs in vitro, suggesting their potential use in immunotherapy. More recently, a very interesting work showed that HIV p24 protein adsorbed on the surface of surfactant-free anionic poly(D,L-lactide) (PLA) nanoparticles were efficiently taken-up by mouse DCs, inducing DC maturation. he p24-nanoparticles induced enhanced cellular and mucosal immune responses in mice. Although this targeting is seen in ex vivo-generated DCs and not in vivo DCs, the efficient delivery of the antigen to DCs through the nanoparticles is an important demonstration that may eventually be applied to in vivo DC targeting.

Clinical Trial

he most clinically advanced application of nanotechnology for immunotherapy of HIV/AIDS is the DermaVir patch that has reached Phase II clinical trials (9). DermaVir is a targeted nanoparticle system based on polyethyleimine mannose (PEIm), glucose and HIV antigen coding DNA plasmid formulated into nanoparticles (~100 nm) and administered under a patch after a skin preparation. The nanoparticles are delivered to epidermal Langerhans cells that trap the nanoparticles and mature to become highly immunogenic on their way to the lymph nodes. Mature DCs containing the nanoparticles present antigens to T cells inducing cellular immunity. Preclinical studies and Phase I clinical trials showed safety and tolerability of the DermaVir patch, which led the progression to Phase II trials. This is the first nanotechnology-based immunotherapy for HIV/AIDS that has reached the clinic and encourages further work in this area.

Table 1

Summary of nanotechnology-based treatment approaches for HIV/AIDS.

Type of therapy Therapeutic agent (drug or gene) Nanotechnology delivery platform Development stage Refs.
Antiretroviral therapy Rilpivirine (TMC278) Poloxamer 338/TPGS 1000 Preclinical [35]
Indinavir Liposome-laden macrophages Preclinical [3638]
Stavudine Mannose- and galactose-targeted liposome Preclinical [3941]
Zidovudine Mannose-targeted liposome Preclinical [42]
Efavirenz Mannose-targeted dendrimer Preclinical [43,45]
Lamivudine Mannose-targeted dendrimer Preclinical [46]
Nanomaterials Fullerene derivatives Preclinical [4955]
Dendrimers Preclinical [56,57]
Silver nanoparticles Preclinical [58,59]
SDC-1721/gold nanoparticles Gold nanoparticles Preclinical [60]
Gene therapy siRNA Peptide fusion proteins, protamine–antibody fusion proteins, dendrimers, single walled carbon nanotubes, peptide–antibody conjugates Preclinical [7781]
Immunotherapy P24 protein Poly (D,L-lactide) nanoparticles/dendritic cells Preclinical [98]
Plasmid DNA Mannose-targeted polyethyleimine polymers Phase II clinical trials [99]

Note:  to open the references in the table 1, please go to ref 1 in this post to see full ref info.

Nanotechnology for HIV/AIDS prevention

The search for a safe and effective HIV/AIDS vaccine has been challenging in the almost three decades since the discovery of the disease. Recently, high-profile clinical trial failures have prompted great debate over the vaccine research, with some suggesting the need for a major focus on fundamental research, with fewer efforts on clinical trials.

The major challenges in the development of a preventive HIV/AIDS vaccine have been the extensive viral strain and sequence diversity, viral evasion of humoral and cellular immune responses, coupled with the lack of methods to elicit broadly reactive neutralizing antibodies and cytotoxic T cells. The challenge associated with delivery of any exogenous antigen (such as nanoparticles) to APCs, is that exogenous antigens require specialized ‘cross-presentation’ in order to be presented by MHC class I and activate CD8+cytotoxic T cells.

his requirement for cytosolic delivery of antigens and cross-presentation represents yet another hurdle for HIV intracellular antigen vaccine, but potentially an advantage of nanodelivery. Humoral responses (neutralizing antibodies produced by B cells) are generated to intact antigen presented on the surface for the virus, or nanoparticles, but these humoral responses typically require ‘help’ from CD4+ T cells, but rather both. Nanoparticles have potential as adjuvants and delivery systems for vaccines. Table 2 present the different approaches.

Table 2

Summary of nanotechnology developments for prevention of HIV/AIDS.

Type of preventive agent Antigen/adjuvant or drug Nanotechnology platform Development stage Refs.
Protein or peptide vaccine gp41, gp120, gp160, p24, Env, Gag, Tat Liposomes, nanoemulsion, MF59, PLA nanoparticles, poly(γ-glutamic acid) nanoparticles Preclinical [108111]
[119120]
[122125]
[128130]
DNA vaccine env, rev, gag, tat, CpG ODN Liposomes, nanoemulsion, PLA nanoparticles Preclinical [115,121]
Inactivated viral particle Inactivated HIV viral particle Polystyrene nanospheres Preclinical [126127]
Microbicides L-lysine dendrimer L-lysine dendrimer Phase I/II [136138]
PLGA nanoparticles
PSC-RANTES PLGA Preclinical [139]
siRNA Nanoparticles, lipids, cholesterol conjugation Preclinical [141144]

ODN: Oligonucleotides; PLA: Poly(D,L-lactide); PLGA: Poly(D,L-lacticide-co-glycolide).

Note:  to open the references in the table 2, please go to ref 1 in this post to see full ref info.

 

Summary

Nanotechnology can impact the treatment and prevention of HIV/AIDS with various innovative approaches. Treatment options may be improved using nanotechnology platforms for delivery of antiretroviral drugs. Controlled and sustained release of the drugs could improve patient adherence to drug regimens, increasing treatment effectiveness.

While there is exciting potential for nanomedicine in the treatment of HIV/AIDS, challenges remain to be overcome before the potential is realized. These include toxicity of nanomaterials, stability of nanoparticles in physiological conditions and their scalability for large-scale production. These are challenges general to all areas of nanomedicine and various works are underway to tackle them.

Another important consideration in investigating nanotechnology-based systems for HIV/AIDS is the economic aspect, as the hardest hit and most vulnerable populations reside in underdeveloped and economically poor countries. In the case of antiretroviral therapy, nanotherapeutics may increase the overall cost of treatment, reducing the overall value. However, if the nanotherapeutics could improve patient adherence by reducing dosing frequency as expected, and furthermore, if they can eradicate viral reservoirs leading to a sterile immunity, these advantages may effectively offset the added cost.

 

Ref:

1. Mamo T, Moseman EA., Kolishetti N., Salvadoe-Morales C., Shi J., Kuritzkes DR., Langer R., von-Adrian U and Farokhzad OF.   Emerging nanotechnology approaches for HIV/AIDS treatment and prevention. Nanomedicine (Lond) 2010; 5(2): 269-295.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2861897/

2. Merson MH. The HIV-AIDS pandemic at 25 – the global response. N Engl J Med.2006;354(23):2414–2417

3. Walensky RP, Paltiel AD, Losina E, et al. The survival benefits of AIDS treatment in the United States. J Infect Dis. 2006;194(1):11–19

4. Richman DD, Margolis DM, Delaney M, Greene WC, Hazuda D, Pomerantz RJ. The challenge of finding a cure for HIV infection. Science. 2009;323(5919):1304–1307)

5.Sax PE, Cohen CJ, Kuritzkes DR. HIV Essentials. Physicians’ Press; Royal Oak, MI, USA: 2007.

6. Lamers SL, Salemi M, Galligan DC, et al. Extensive HIV-1 intra-host recombination is common in tissues with abnormal histopathology. PLoS One. 2009;4(3):E5065.

7. Vyas TK, Shah L, Amiji MM. Nanoparticulate drug carriers for delivery of HIV/AIDS therapy to viral reservoir sites. Expert Opin Drug Deliv. 2006;3(5):613–628.

8. Amiji MM, Vyas TK, Shah LK. Role of nanotechnology in HIV/AIDS treatment: Potential to overcome the viral reservoir challenge. Discov Med. 2006;6(34):157–162

9. Lori F, Calarota SA, Lisziewicz J. Nanochemistry-based immunotherapy for HIV-1. Curr Med Chem. 2007;14(18):1911–1919

Read Full Post »

Author: Tilda Barliya PhD

Metastasis, the spread of cancer cells from a primary tumour to seed secondary tumours in distant sites, is one of the greatest challenges in cancer treatment today. For many patients, by the time cancer is detected, metastasis  has already occurred. Over 80% of patients diagnosed  with lung cancer, for example, present with metastatic  disease. Few patients with metastatic cancer are cured by surgical intervention, and other treatment modalities are limited. Across all cancer types, only one in five patients diagnosed with metastatic cancer will survive more than 5 years. (1,2).

Metastatic Cancer 

  • Metastatic cancer is cancer that has spread from the place where it first started to another place in the body.
  • Metastatic cancer has the same name and same type of cancer cells as the original cancer.
  • The most common sites of cancer metastasis are the lungs, bones, and liver.
  • Treatment for metastatic cancer usually depends on the type of cancer and the size, location, and number of metastatic tumors.

How do cancer cells spread (3)

  • Local invasion: Cancer cells invade nearby normal tissue.
  • Intravasation: Cancer cells invade and move through the walls of nearby lymph vessels or blood vessels.
  • Circulation: Cancer cells move through the lymphatic system and the bloodstream to other parts of the body.

The ability of a cancer cell to metastasize successfully depends on its individual properties; the properties of the noncancerous cells, including immune system cells, present at the original location; and the properties of the cells it encounters in the lymphatic system or the bloodstream and at the final destination in another part of the body. Not all cancer cells, by themselves, have the ability to metastasize. In addition, the noncancerous cells at the original location may be able to block cancer cell metastasis. Furthermore, successfully reaching another location in the body does not guarantee that a metastatic tumor will form. Metastatic cancer cells can lie dormant (not grow) at a distant site for many years before they begin to grow again, if at all.

Although cancer therapies are improving, many drugs are not reaching the sites of metastases, and doubt  remains over the efficacy of those that do. Methods  that are effective for treating large, well-vascularized tumours may be inadequate when dealing with small clusters of disseminated malignant cells.

We expect that the expanding capabilities of nanotechnology, especially in targeting, detection and particle trafficking, will enable  novel approaches to treat cancers even after metastatic dissemination.

 

Lymph nodes, which are linked by lymphatic vessels, are distributed throughout the body and have an integral role in the immune response. Dissemination of cancer cells through the lymph network is thought to be an important route for metastatic spread. Tumor proximal lymph nodes are often the first site of metastases, and the presence of lymph node metastases signifies further metastatic spread and poor patient survival.

As such, lymph nodes have been targeted using cell-based nanotechnologies

Lymph nodes are small, bean-shaped organs that act as filters along the lymph fluid channels. As lymph fluid leaves the organ (such as breast, lung etc) and eventually goes back into the bloodstream, the lymph nodes try to catch and trap cancer cells before they reach other parts of the body. Having cancer cells in the lymph nodes suggests an increased risk of the cancer spreading. It is thus very important to evaluate the involvement of lymph nodes when choosing the best possible treatment for the patient.

Although current mapping methods are available such as CT and MRI scans, PET scan, Endobronchial Ultrasound, Mediastinoscopy and lymph node biopsy, sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping and nodal treatment in lung cancer remain inadequate for routine clinical use. 

Certain characteristics are associated with preferential (but not exclusive) nanoparticle trafficking to lymph nodes following intravenous administration.

Targeting is often an indirect process, as receptors on the surface of leukocytes bind nanoparticles and transfer them to lymph nodes as part of a normal immune response. Several strategies have been used to enhance nanoparticle uptake by leukocytes in circulation. Coating iron-oxide nanoparticles with carbohydrates, such as dextran, results in the increased accumulation of these nanoparticles in lymph nodes. Conjugating peptides and antibodies, such as immunoglobulin G (IgG), to the particle surface also increases their accumulation in the lymphatic network. In general, negatively charged particles are taken up at faster rates than positively charged or uncharged particles. Conversely, ‘stealth’ polymers, such as polyethylene glycol (PEG), on the surface of nanoparticles, can inhibit uptake by leukocytes, thereby reducing accumulation in the lymph nodes.

Lymph node targeting may be achieved by other routes of administration. Tsuda and co-workers reported that non-cationic particles with a size range of 6–34nm, when introduced to the lungs (intrapulmonary administration), are trafficked rapidly (<1 hour) to local lymph nodes. Administering particles <80 nm in size subcutaneously also results in trafficking to lymph nodes. Interestingly, some studies have indicated that non-pegylated particles exhibit enhanced accumulation in the lymphatics and that pegylated particles tend to appear in the circulation several hours after administration.

Over the last twenty years, sentinel lymph node (SLN) imaging has revolutionized the treatment of several malignancies, such has melanoma and breast cancer, and has the potential to drastically improve treatment in other malignancies, including lung cancer. Several attempts at developing an easy, reliable, and effective method for SLN mapping in lung cancer have been unsuccessful due to unique difficulties inherent to the lung and to operating in the thoracic cavity.

An inexpensive method offering rapid, intraoperative identification of SLNs, with minimal risk to both patient and provider, would allow for improved staging in patients. This, in turn, would permit better selection of patients for adjuvant therapy, thus reducing morbidity in those patients for whom adjuvant treatment is inappropriate, and ensuring that those who need this added therapy actually receive it. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3109504/)

Current methods for SLN identification involve the use of radioactivity-guided mapping with technetium-99m sulfur colloid and/or visual mapping using vital blue dyes. Unfortunately these methods can be inadequate for SLN mapping in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) The use of vital blue dyes is limited in vivo by poor visibility, particularly in the presence of anthracotic mediastinal nodes, thereby decreasing the signal-to-background ratio (SBR) that enables nodal detection. Similarly, results with technetium-99m sulfur colloid have been mixed when used in the thoracic cavity, where hilar structures and aberrant patterns of lymphatic drainage make detection more difficult.

Although Nomori et al. have reported an 83% nodal identification rate following a preoperative injection of technetium-99 colloid, there is an associated increased risk of pneumothorax and bleeding with this method. Further, the recently completed CALGB 140203 multicenter Phase 2 trial investigating the use of intraoperative technetium-99m colloid found an identification rate of only 51% with this technique.  Clearly a technology with greater accuracy, improved SBR, and less potential risk to surgeon and patient would be welcome in the field of thoracic oncology.

Near-infrared (NIR) fluorescence imaging has the potential to meet this difficult challenge.

Near-Infrared Light

NIR light is defined as that within the wavelength range of 700 to 1000 nm. Although NIR light is invisible to the naked eye, it can be thought of as “redder” than UV and visible light.

  • Absorption, scatter, and autofluorescence are all significantly reduced at redder wavelengths. For instance, Hemoglobin, water, lipids, and other endogenous chromophores, such as melanin, have their lowest absorption within the NIR spectrum, which permits increased photon depth penetration into tissues
  • In addition, imaging can also be affected by photon scatter, which describes the reflection and/or deflection of light when it interacts with tissue. Scatter, on an absolute scale, is often ten-times higher than absorption. However, the two major types of scatter, Mie and Rayleigh, are both reduced in the NIR, making the use of NIR wavelengths especially important for the reduction of photon attenuation.
  • living tissue has extremely high “autofluorescence” in the UV and visible wavelength ranges due to endogenous fluorophores, such as NADH and the porphyrins. Therefore, UV/visible fluorescence imaging of the intestines, bladder, and gallbladder is essentially precluded. However, in the NIR spectrum, autofluorescence is extremely low, providing the black imaging background necessary for optimal detection of a NIR fluorophore within the surgical field
  • Additionally, optical imaging techniques, such as NIR fluorescence, eliminate the need for ionizing radiation. This, combined with the availability of a NIR fluorophore already FDA-approved for other indications and having extremely low toxicity (discussed below), make this a potentially safe imaging modality.

The main disadvantage is that it’s invisible to the human eye, requiring special imaging-systems to “see” the NIR fluorescence.

Currently there are three intraoperative NIR imaging systems in various stages of development:

  • The SPY system (Novadaq, Canada) – utilizes laser light excitation in order to obtain fluorescent images. The Spy system has been studied for imaging patency of vascular anastamoses following CABG and organ transplantation
  • The Photodynamic Eye(Hamamatsu, Japan) – is presently available only in Japan
  • The Fluorescence-Assisted Resection and Exploration (FLARE) system ()- developed by the authors’ laboratory utilizes NIR light-emitting diode (LED) excitation, eliminating the need for a potentially harmful laser. Additionally, the FLAREsystem has the advantage of being able to provide simultaneous color imaging, NIR fluorescence imaging, and color-NIR merged images, allowing the surgeon to simultaneously visualize invisible NIR fluorescence images within the context of surgical anatomy.

Near-Infrared Fluorescent Nanoparticle Contrast Agents

The ideal contrast agent for SLN mapping would be anionic and within 10–50 nm in size in order to facilitate rapid uptake into lymphatic vessels with optimal retention within the SLN.

Due to the lack of endogenous NIR tissue fluorescence, exogenous contrast agents must be administered for in vivo studies. The most important contrast agents that emit within the NIR spectrum are the heptamethine cyanines fluorophores, of which indocyanine green (ICG) is the most widely used, and fluorescent semiconductor nanocrystals, also known as quantum dots (QDs).

  • ICG is an extremely safe NIR fluorophore, with its only known toxicity being rare anaphylaxis. The dye was FDA approved in 1958 for systemic administration for indicator-dilution studies including measurements of cardiac output and hepatic function. Additionally, it is commonly used in ophthalmic angiography. When given intravenously, ICG is rapidly bound to plasma albumin and cleared from the blood via the biliary system. Peak absorption and emission of ICG occur at 780 nm and 830 nm respectively, within the window where in vivo tissue absorption is at its minimum. ICG has a relatively neutral charge, has a hydrodynamic diameter of only 1.2 nm, and is relatively hydrophobic. Unfortunately, this results in rapid transport out of the SLN and relatively low fluorescence yield, thereby decreasing its efficacy in mapping techniques. However, noncovalent adsorption of ICG to human serum albumin (HSA), as occurs within plasma, results in an anionic nanoparticle with a diameter of 7.3 nm and a three-fold increase in fluorescence yield markedly improving its utility in SLN mapping.
  • QDs consist of an inorganic heavy metal core and shell which emit within the NIR spectrum. This structure is then surrounded by a hydrophilic organic coating which facilitates aqeuous solubility and lymphatic distrubtion. QDs have been extensively studied and are ideal for SLN mapping as their hydrodynamic diameter can be customized to the appropriate size within a narrow distribution (15–20 nm), they can be engineered to have an anionic surface charge, and exhibit an extremely high SBRs with significant photostability. Unfortunately, safety concerns due to the presence of heavy metals within the QDs so far have precluded clinical application

Human Clinical Trials and NIR SLN mapping

Several studies have investigated the clinical use of indocyanine green without adsorption to HSA for NIR fluorescence-guided SLN mapping in breast and gastric cancer with good success (9-13).

Kitai et al. first examined this technique in 2005 in breast cancer patients, and was able to identify a SLN node in 17 of 18 patients using NIR fluorescence rather than the visible green color of ICG (9). Sevick-Muraca et al. reported similar results using significantly lower microdoses of ICG (10 – 100 μg), successfully identifying the SLN in 8 of 9 patients (11). Similar to these subcutaneous studies, 56 patients with gastric cancer underwent endoscopic ICG injection into the submucosa around the tumor 1 to 3 days preoperatively or injection directly into the subserosa intraoperatively with identification of the SLN in 54 patients (13).

Recently, Troyan et al. have completed a pilot phase I clinical trial examining the utility of NIR imaging the ICG:HSA nanoparticle fluorophore for SLN mapping/biopsy in breast cancer using the FLAREsystem. In this study, 6 patients received both 99mTc-sulfur colloid lymphoscintigraphy along with ICG:HSA at micromolar doses. SLNs were identified in all patients using both methods. In 4 of 6 patients the SLNs identified were the same, while in the remaining two, lymphoscintigraphy identified an additional node in one patient and ICG:HSA identified an additional SLN in the other. Irrespective, this study demonstrates that NIR SLN mapping with low dose ICG:HSA is a viable method for intraoperative SLN identification.

Nanotechnology and Drug Delivery in Lung cancer

We previously explored Lung cancer and nanotechnology aspects as polymer nanotechnology has been an area of significant research over the past decade as polymer nanoparticle drug delivery systems offer several advantages over traditional methods of chemotherapy delivery

see: (15) http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/11/08/lung-cancer-nsclc-drug-administration-and-nanotechnology/                (16) http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/12/01/diagnosing-lung-cancer-in-exhaled-breath-using-gold-nanoparticles/

As the importance of micrometastatic lymphatic spread of tumor becomes clearer, there has been much interest in the use of nanoparticles for lymphatic drug delivery. The considerable focus on developing an effective method for SLN mapping for lung cancer is indicative of the importance of nodal spread on overall survival.

Our lab is investigating the use of image-guided nanoparticles engineered for lymphatic drug delivery. We have previously described the synthesis of novel, pH-responsive methacrylate nanoparticle systems (14). Following a simple subcutaneous injection of NIR fluorophore-labeled nanoparticles 70 nm in size, we have shown that we can deliver paclitaxel loaded within the particles to regional draining lymph nodes in several organ systems of Yorkshire pigs while simultaneously confirming nodal migration using NIR fluorescent light. Future studies will need to investigate the ability of nanoparticles to treat and prevent nodal metastases in animal cancer models. Additionally, the development of tumor specific nanoparticles will potentially allow for targeting of chemotherapy to small groups of metastatic tumor cells further limiting systemic toxicities by narrowing the delivery of cytotoxic drugs.

Ref:

1. http://www.nature.com.rproxy.tau.ac.il/nrc/journal/v12/n1/pdf/nrc3180.pdf

2. http://www.nature.com/nrc/focus/metastasis/index.html

3. http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Sites-Types/metastatic

4. http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-help/about-cancer/what-is-cancer/body/the-lymphatic-system

5. http://www.macmillan.org.uk/Cancerinformation/Cancertypes/Lymphnodessecondary/Secondarycancerlymphnodes.aspx

6. Khullar O, Frangioni JV and Colson YL. Image-Guided Sentinel Lymph Node Mapping and Nanotechnology-Based Nodal Treatment in Lung Cancer using Invisible Near-Infrared Fluorescent Light. Semi Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2009 :21 (4);  309-315. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3109504/

7. Stacker SA, Achen MG, Jussila L,  Baldwin ME and Alitalo K. Metastasis: Lymphangiogenesis and cancer metastasis.  Nature Reviews Cancer 2002 2, 573-583. http://www.nature.com/nrc/journal/v2/n8/full/nrc863.html

8. Schroeder A., Heller DA., Winslow MM., Dahlman JE., Pratt GW., Langer R., Jacks T and Anderson DG.. Nature Reviews Cancer 2012; 12(1), 39-50. Treating metastatic cancer with nanotechnology. http://www.nature.com.rproxy.tau.ac.il/nrc/journal/v12/n1/pdf/nrc3180.pdf

http://www.nature.com.rproxy.tau.ac.il/nrc/journal/v12/n1/full/nrc3180.html

9. Kitai T, Inomoto T, Miwa M, et al. Fluorescence navigation with indocyanine green for detecting sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer. Breast Cancer. 2005;12:211–215.

10. Ogasawara Y, Ikeda H, Takahashi M, et al. Evaluation of breast lymphatic pathways with indocyanine green fluorescence imaging in patients with breast cancer. World journal of surgery.2008;32:1924–1929.

11. Sevick-Muraca EM, Sharma R, Rasmussen JC, et al. Imaging of lymph flow in breast cancer patients after microdose administration of a near-infrared fluorophore: feasibility study. Radiology.2008;246:734–741.

12. Miyashiro I, Miyoshi N, Hiratsuka M, et al. Detection of sentinel node in gastric cancer surgery by indocyanine green fluorescence imaging: comparison with infrared imaging. Ann Surg Oncol.2008;15:1640–1643.

13. Tajima Y, Yamazaki K, Masuda Y, et al. Sentinel node mapping guided by indocyanine green fluorescence imaging in gastric cancer. Ann Surg. 2009;249:58–62.

14. Griset AP, Walpole J, Liu R, et al. Expansile nanoparticles: synthesis, characterization, and in vivo efficacy of an acid-responsive drug delivery system. J Am Chem Soc. 2009;131:2469–2471

15. http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/11/08/lung-cancer-nsclc-drug-administration-and-nanotechnology/

16.  http://pharmaceuticalintelligence.com/2012/12/01/diagnosing-lung-cancer-in-exhaled-breath-using-gold-nanoparticles/

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »