A Complex Role for Calcium Signaling in Colorectal Cancer Development and Progression

Clinical data suggest that many malignant cancers are associated with hypercalcemia. Hypercalcemia can facilitate the proliferation and metastasis of gastric and colon tumors, and has been considered a hallmark of end-stage disease. However, it has also been reported that dietary calcium or vitamin D supplementation could reduce the risk of many types of cancers. In particular, the intestines can absorb considerable amounts of calcium via Ca²⁺-permeable ion channels, and hypercalcemia is common in patients with colorectal cancer. Thus, this review considers the role of calcium signaling in the context of colorectal cancer and summarizes the functions of specific regulators of cellular calcium levels in the proliferation, invasion, metastasis, cell death, and drug resistance of colorectal cancer cells. The data reveal that even a slight upregulation of intracellular Ca²⁺ signaling can facilitate the onset and progression of colorectal cancer, while continuous Ca²⁺ influx and Ca²⁺ overload may cause tumor cell death. This dual function of Ca²⁺ signaling adds nuance to the debate over the hallmarks of colorectal cancer, and may even provide new directions and strategies for clinical interventions.

Matuzumab plus epirubicin, cisplatin and capecitabine (ECX) compared with epirubicin, cisplatin and capecitabine alone as first-line treatment in patients with advanced oesophago-gastric cancer: a randomised, multicentre open-label phase II study

BACKGROUND

Clinical data showed promising antitumour activity with feasible tolerability for matuzumab plus epirubicin, cisplatin and capecitabine (ECX) chemotherapy in untreated advanced oesophago-gastric (OG) cancer. The aim was to evaluate the efficacy of matuzumab plus ECX versus ECX alone.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this multicentre, randomised open-label phase II study, 72 patients with metastatic OG cancer were randomly assigned to either 800 mg matuzumab weekly plus epirubicin 50 mg/m², cisplatin 60 mg/m² on day 1 and capecitabine 1250 mg/m² daily in a 21-day cycle (ECX) or the same ECX regimen alone. The primary end point was objective response. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), quality of life, safety and tolerability.

RESULTS

Following random assignment, 35 patients (median age 59 years) received ECX/matuzumab and 36 patients (median age 64 years) ECX. The addition of matuzumab to ECX did not improve objective response: 31% for ECX/matuzumab [95% confidence interval (CI) 17-49] compared with 58% for the ECX arm (95% CI 41-74) P = 0.994 (one sided). There was no significant difference in median PFS: 4.8 months (95% CI 2.9-8.1) for ECX/matuzumab versus 7.1 months (95% CI 4.4-8.5) for ECX, or in median OS: 9.4 months (95% CI 7.5-16.2), compared with 12.2 months (95% CI 9.8-13.8 months). Grade 3/4 treatment-related toxicity was observed in 27 and 25 patients in the ECX/matuzumab and ECX groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Matuzumab 800 mg weekly combined with ECX chemotherapy does not increase response or survival for patients with advanced OG cancer. Therefore, ECX/matuzumab should not be examined further in phase III trials.