A new complementary procedure for patients affected by head and neck cancer: Chemo-predictive assay

Cancer Stem Cell Assay for the Treatment of Platinum-Resistant Recurrent Ovarian Cancer

BACKGROUND

Disease recurrence and progression of ovarian cancer is a common event, which is accompanied by the development of platinum-resistant or refractory disease. The presence of chemo-resistant Cancer Stem Cells (CSCs) contribute to tumor propagation, maintenance, and treatment resistance of this difficult to treat disease. We have developed ChemoID, a cytotoxic synergy assay against CSCs that identifies the most effective chemotherapy treatment from a panel of FDA-approved chemotherapies using fresh cancer biopsies.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Ascites or interventional radiology biopsies were collected under physician order from 78 consecutive patients affected by 3rd relapsed ovarian cancer. Test results from the assay were used when possible to treat patients with the highest cell kill drugs, taking into consideration their health status and using dose reductions, if needed. A chart analysis and review of CT and PET scans were performed to determine patients' outcomes for tumor response, Progression-Free Survival (PFS), and Overall Survival (OS).

RESULTS

We observed that recurrent ovarian cancer patients treated with high-cell kill chemotherapy agents guided by the CSCs drug response assay had an improvement in their median PFS and OS when compared to historical median PFS and OS and/or when compared to patients who could not receive high cell kill chemotherapies (PFS low cell kill 3.5 months vs. high cell kill 12.0 months; OS low cell kill 6.0 months vs. high cell kill 15.0 months).

CONCLUSION

This data indicates that the drug cytotoxicity assay aimed at targeting CSCs may be a useful tool for optimizing treatment selection when first-line therapy fails, and when there are multiple clinically-acceptable and -equivalent treatments available.

Tumor Chemosensitivity Assays Are Helpful for Personalized Cytotoxic Treatments in Cancer Patients

Tumor chemosensitivity assays (TCAs), also known as drug response assays or individualized tumor response tests, have been gaining attention over the past few decades. Although there have been strong positive correlations between the results of these assays and clinical outcomes, they are still not considered routine tests in the care of cancer patients. The correlations between the assays' results (drug sensitivity or resistance) and the clinical evaluations (e.g., response to treatment, progression-free survival) are highly promising. However, there is still a need to design randomized controlled prospective studies to secure the place of these assays in routine use. One of the best ideas to increase the value of these assays could be the combination of the assay results with the omics technologies (e.g., pharmacogenetics that gives an idea of the possible side effects of the drugs). In the near future, the importance of personalized chemotherapy is expected to dictate the use of these omics technologies. The omics relies on the macromolecules (Deoxyribonucleic acid -DNA-, ribonucleic acid -RNA-) and proteins (meaning the structure) while TCAs operate on living cell populations (meaning the function). Therefore, wise combinations of TCAs and omics could be a highly promising novel landscape in the modern care of cancer patients.

Clinical relevance of cancer stem cell chemotherapeutic assay for recurrent ovarian cancer

Introduction

Disease recurrence and progression of ovarian cancer is common with the development of platinum-resistant or refractory disease. This is due in large part to the presence of chemo-resistant cancer stem cells (CSCs) that contribute to tumor propagation, maintenance, and treatment resistance. We developed a CSCs drug cytotoxicity assay (ChemoID) to identify the most effective chemotherapy treatment from a panel of FDA approved chemotherapies.

Methods

Ascites and pleural fluid samples were collected under physician order from 45 consecutive patients affected by 3rd-5th relapsed ovarian cancer. Test results from the assay were used to treat patients with the highest cell kill drugs, taking into consideration their health status and using dose reductions, as needed. A retrospective chart review of CT and PET scans was used to determine patients' outcomes for tumor response, time to recurrence, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).

Results

We observed that recurrent ovarian cancer patients treated with high-cell kill chemotherapy agents guided by the CSCs drug response assay had an improvement in the median PFS corresponding to 5.4 months (3rd relapse), 3.6 months (4th relapse), and 3.9 months (5th relapse) when compared to historical data. Additionally, we observed that ovarian cancer patients identified as non-responders by the CSC drug response assay had 30 times the hazard of death compared to those women that were identified as responders with respective median survivals of 6 months vs. 13 months. We also found that ChemoID treated patients on average had an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) between -$18,421 and $7,241 per life-year saved (LYS).

Conclusions

This study demonstrated improved PFS and OS for recurrent ovarian cancer patients treated with assay-guided chemotherapies while decreasing the cost of treatment.

•

Ovarian cancer progression and recurrence is mostly attributed to the presence of cancer stem cells (CSCs), which are chemo-resistant.

•

Eliminating CSCs is a strategy that could improve patients' outcome.

•

We developed a CSC drug cytotoxicity assay to identify the most effective chemotherapy treatment from a panel of FDA approved chemotherapies.

•

Recurrent ovarian cancer patients treated with high-cell kill chemotherapy agents guided by the CSCs drug response assay had an improvement in the median PFS when compared to historical data.

Oral cancer stem cells - properties and consequences

Research on cancer stem cells (CSCs) has greatly increased in the field of medicine and pathology; however, some conceptual misunderstandings are still present among the public as well as within the general scientific community that is not yet familiar with the subject. The very first problem is the misinterpretation of CSCs as a synonym of their normal counterparts, the well-known stem cells (SCs). Particularly in Dentistry, another common mistake is the misinterpretation of oral CSCs as normal tooth-derived SCs. The present review aims to clarify important concepts related to normal SCs and CSCs, as well as discuss the relevance of CSCs to the development, metastasis and therapy resistance of oral squamous cell carcinoma.

Analysis of Chemopredictive Assay for Targeting Cancer Stem Cells in Glioblastoma Patients

INTRODUCTION

The prognosis of glioblastoma (GBM) treated with standard-of-care maximal surgical resection and concurrent adjuvant temozolomide (TMZ)/radiotherapy remains very poor (less than 15 months). GBMs have been found to contain a small population of cancer stem cells (CSCs) that contribute to tumor propagation, maintenance, and treatment resistance. The highly invasive nature of high-grade gliomas and their inherent resistance to therapy lead to very high rates of recurrence. For these reasons, not all patients with similar diagnoses respond to the same chemotherapy, schedule, or dose. Administration of ineffective anticancer therapy is not only costly but more importantly burdens the patient with unnecessary toxicity and selects for the development of resistant cancer cell clones. We have developed a drug response assay (ChemoID) that identifies the most effective chemotherapy against CSCs and bulk of tumor cells from of a panel of potential treatments, offering great promise for individualized cancer management. Providing the treating physician with drug response information on a panel of approved drugs will aid in personalized therapy selections of the most effective chemotherapy for individual patients, thereby improving outcomes. A prospective study was conducted evaluating the use of the ChemoID drug response assay in GBM patients treated with standard of care.

METHODS

Forty-one GBM patients (mean age 54 years, 59% male), all eligible for a surgical biopsy, were enrolled in an Institutional Review Board-approved protocol, and fresh tissue samples were collected for drug sensitivity testing. Patients were all treated with standard-of-care TMZ plus radiation with or without maximal surgery, depending on the status of the disease. Patients were prospectively monitored for tumor response, time to recurrence, progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Odds ratio (OR) associations of 12-month recurrence, PFS, and OS outcomes were estimated for CSC, bulk tumor, and combined assay responses for the standard-of-care TMZ treatment; sensitivities/specificities, areas under the curve (AUCs), and risk reclassification components were examined.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 8 months (range 3-49 months). For every 5% increase in in vitro CSC cell kill by TMZ, 12-month patient response (nonrecurrence of cancer) increased two-fold, OR=2.2 (P=.016). Similar but somewhat less supported associations with the bulk tumor test were seen, OR=2.75 (P=.07) for each 5% bulk tumor cell kill by TMZ. Combining CSC and bulk tumor assay results in a single model yielded a statistically supported CSC association, OR=2.36 (P=.036), but a much attenuated remaining bulk tumor association, OR=1.46 (P=.472). AUCs and [sensitivity/specificity] at optimal outpoints (>40% CSC cell kill and >55% bulk tumor cell kill) were AUC=0.989 [sensitivity=100/specificity=97], 0.972 [100/89], and 0.989 [100/97] for the CSC only, bulk tumor only, and combined models, respectively. Risk categorization of patients was improved by 11% when using the CSC test in conjunction with the bulk test (risk reclassification nonevent net reclassification improvement [NRI] and overall NRI=0.111, P=.030). Median recurrence time was 20 months for patients with a positive (>40% cell kill) CSC test versus only 3 months for those with a negative CSC test, whereas median recurrence time was 13 months versus 4 months for patients with a positive (>55% cell kill) bulk test versus negative. Similar favorable results for the CSC test were observed for PFS and OS outcomes. Panel results across 14 potential other treatments indicated that 34/41 (83%) potentially more optimal alternative therapies may have been chosen using CSC results, whereas 27/41 (66%) alternative therapies may have been chosen using bulk tumor results.

CONCLUSIONS

The ChemoID CSC drug response assay has the potential to increase the accuracy of bulk tumor assays to help guide individualized chemotherapy choices. GBM cancer recurrence may occur quickly if the CSC test has a low in vitro cell kill rate even if the bulk tumor test cell kill rate is high.