Soyasaponin I alleviates hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage by inhibiting the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system

BACKGROUND

Hypertensive intracerebral hemorrhage (HICH) is a life-threatening disease and lacks effective treatments. Previous studies have confirmed that metabolic profiles altered after ischemic stroke, but how brain metabolism changes after HICH was unclear. This study aimed to explore the metabolic profiles after HICH and the therapeutic effects of soyasaponin I on HICH.

METHODS

HICH model was established first. Hematoxylin and eosin staining was used to estimate the pathological changes after HICH. Western blot and Evans blue extravasation assay were applied to determine the integrity of the blood-brain barrier (BBB). Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was used to detect the activation of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS). Next, liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry-untargeted metabolomics was utilized to analyze the metabolic profiles of brain tissues after HICH. Finally, soyasaponin I was administered to HICH rats, and the severity of HICH and activation of the RAAS were further assessed.

RESULTS

We successfully constructed HICH model. HICH significantly impaired BBB integrity and activated RAAS. HICH increased PE(14:0/24:1(15Z)), arachidonoyl serinol, PS(18:0/22:6(4Z, 7Z, 10Z, 13Z, 16Z, and 19Z)), PS(20:1(11Z)/20:5(5Z, 8Z, 11Z, 14Z, and 17Z)), glucose 1-phosphate, etc., in the brain, whereas decreased creatine, tripamide, D-N-(carboxyacetyl)alanine, N-acetylaspartate, N-acetylaspartylglutamic acid, and so on in the hemorrhagic hemisphere. Cerebral soyasaponin I was found to be downregulated after HICH and supplementation of soyasaponin I inactivated the RAAS and alleviated HICH.

CONCLUSION

The metabolic profiles of the brains changed after HICH. Soyasaponin I alleviated HICH via inhibiting the RAAS and may serve as an effective drug for the treatment of HICH in the future.

Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy for Oligo-Progressive Cancers: Results of the Randomized Phase II STOP Trial

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

In the metastatic setting, there is uncertain benefit to localized eradication of one or more lesions that are progressing despite systemic therapy. This randomized phase II trial examined if patients with ≤5 sites of oligoprogression benefited from the addition of stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABR) to standard of care (SOC) systemic therapy.

MATERIALS/METHODS

Eligibility criteria included age ≥18 years, ECOG performance status 0-2, and oligoprogressive disease, defined as 1-5 lesions actively progressing while on systemic therapy. Patients were required to have at least 3 months of disease stability/response on systemic therapy prior to oligoprogression. After stratifying by type of systemic therapy (cytotoxic vs. non-cytotoxic), patients were randomized 2:1 to SABR to all progressing lesions plus SOC (SABR arm) vs. SOC alone (SOC arm). The trial began exclusive to non-small cell lung cancer but did not meet accrual goals and was expanded in 2019 to include all non-hematologic malignancies. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), lesional control, quality of life (QOL), toxicity, and duration of current systemic agent post-SABR.

RESULTS

Between February 2017 and June 2021, 90 patients with 125 oligoprogressive metastases were enrolled across 8 Canadian institutions, with 59 patients randomized to SABR and 31 to SOC. Median age was 67 years (IQR: 61-73 years) and 39 (43%) were female. The most common primary sites were lung (44% of patients), genitourinary (23%) and breast (13%), with the most common oligo-progressive locations being lung (43%), bone (19%), lymph nodes (14%), and liver (13%). In the SABR arm, the most common fractionations were 35 Gy/5 (38% of lesions) and 50 Gy/5 (18%). Protocol adherence in the SOC arm was suboptimal: 3 patients (10%) withdrew immediately after randomization, and 7 additional patients (23%) received high-dose or ablative therapies. Median follow-up was 31 months. There was no difference in PFS between arms (median PFS 8.4 months in the SABR arm vs. 4.3 months in the SOC arm; however, the curves cross and 2-year PFS was 9% vs. 24% respectively, p = 0.91). Median OS was 31.2 months vs. 27.4 months, respectively (p = 0.22). Lesional control with SABR was 71% vs. 39% with SOC (p = 0.002). Median duration of post-randomization first-line systemic therapy was 10.3 months vs. 7.6 months, respectively (p = 0.71). Treatment was well-tolerated with 2 (3.4%) grade 3 treatment-related toxicities in the SABR arm and no grade 4/5 related events in either arm. QOL did not differ between arms.

CONCLUSION

Despite being a well-tolerated treatment providing superior lesional control, SABR for oligoprogression did not improve PFS or OS. Results may have been impacted by withdrawals and desire for ablative treatments on the SOC arm, and this lack of equipoise may make accrual to phase III trials difficult, although larger studies in select sub-populations are desired. (NCT02756793).