Pharma Strategy Blog

Commentary on Pharma & Biotech Oncology / Hematology New Product Development

Posts tagged ‘brain cancer’

In simple terms, glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is the most common form of brain cancer, but also the most deadly.  Part of the reasons behind this lie in several factors:

  1. It’s a highly complex disease with multiple things going on
  2. It’s heterogeneous – many of the subsets have yet to be identified
  3. Crossing the blood brain barrier is a challenge for therapeutics

You only have to read a couple of papers from Vogelstein’s group and others (see references) to grasp how complex the underlying biology of this disease is.  From IDH1 deletions to EGFR.   Other targets have included PDGFR-alpha, ERBB2 and MET, with limited success.

A few definitions first to make things easier for people to follow:

Amplifications: An increase in the copy number of a particular gene, which can be either inherited or somatic.  Amplification of oncogenes is a preeminent event in the pathogenesis of many types of human cancer.

Deletions: The absence of one (heterozygous deletion) or both (homozygous deletion) copies of a gene in a diploid cell.  Heterozygous deletions may or may not disrupt gene or protein function and cell function as a result.

The current research looked at Nuclear factor of κ-light polypeptide gene enhancer in B-cells (NF-κB), which is a transcription factor activated by the EGFR pathway. Constitutive activation of NF-κB has previously been observed in glioblastomas.   NF-κB inhibitor-α (NFKBIA) represses NF-κB and signaling in the NF-κB and EGFR pathways.

In addition, mutations of NFKBIA have been found in a variety of tumour types, including Hodgkin’s lymphoma, colorectal cancer, melanoma, hepatocellular carcinoma, breast cancer, and multiple myeloma, which suggests that NFKBIA is a tumour suppressor. In other words, it can prevent drive tumourigenesis and prevent existing therapies such as EGFR inhibitors from working well.

To test this idea out, they analyzed human glioblastomas (n=790) for deletions, mutations, or expression of NFKBIA and EGFR and studied the tumour-suppressor activity of NFKBIA in cell culture. They then compared the molecular results with the outcome of glioblastoma in 570 people.

What they found was interesting:

“NFKBIA is often deleted but not mutated in glioblastomas; most deletions occur in nonclassical subtypes of the disease. Deletion of NFKBIA and amplification of EGFR show a pattern of mutual exclusivity.”

The emphasis above is mine.  Unsurprisingly, deletion and low expression of NFKBIA were associated with more unfavourable outcomes:

“Patients who had tumors with NFKBIA deletion had outcomes that were similar to those in patients with tumors harboring EGFR amplification.”

The researchers concluded that:

“Deletion of NFKBIA has an effect that is similar to the effect of EGFR amplification in the pathogenesis of glioblastoma and is associated with comparatively short survival.”

What these results mean is that because NFKBIA plays such a big role downstream and essentially induces cross-talk signalling with EGFR, future therapeutic strategies may need to take this tumour suppressor into consideration.

References:

ResearchBlogging.orgParsons, D., Jones, S., Zhang, X., Lin, J., Leary, R., Angenendt, P., Mankoo, P., Carter, H., Siu, I., Gallia, G., Olivi, A., McLendon, R., Rasheed, B., Keir, S., Nikolskaya, T., Nikolsky, Y., Busam, D., Tekleab, H., Diaz, L., Hartigan, J., Smith, D., Strausberg, R., Marie, S., Shinjo, S., Yan, H., Riggins, G., Bigner, D., Karchin, R., Papadopoulos, N., Parmigiani, G., Vogelstein, B., Velculescu, V., & Kinzler, K. (2008). An Integrated Genomic Analysis of Human Glioblastoma Multiforme Science, 321 (5897), 1807-1812 DOI: 10.1126/science.1164382

Phillips, H., Kharbanda, S., Chen, R., Forrest, W., Soriano, R., Wu, T., Misra, A., Nigro, J., Colman, H., & Soroceanu, L. (2006). Molecular subclasses of high-grade glioma predict prognosis, delineate a pattern of disease progression, and resemble stages in neurogenesis Cancer Cell, 9 (3), 157-173 DOI: 10.1016/j.ccr.2006.02.019

Bredel M, Scholtens DM, Harsh GR, Bredel C, Chandler JP, Renfrow JJ, Yadav AK, Vogel H, Scheck AC, Tibshirani R, & Sikic BI (2009).  A network model of a cooperative genetic landscape in brain tumors. JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association, 302 (3), 261-75 PMID: 19602686

Bredel, M., Scholtens, D., Yadav, A., Alvarez, A., Renfrow, J., Chandler, J., Yu, I., Carro, M., Dai, F., Tagge, M., Ferrarese, R., Bredel, C., Phillips, H., Lukac, P., Robe, P., Weyerbrock, A., Vogel, H., Dubner, S., Mobley, B., He, X., Scheck, A., Sikic, B., Aldape, K., Chakravarti, A., & Harsh, G. (2011). NFKBIA Deletion in Glioblastomas.  New England Journal of Medicine, 364 (7), 627-637 DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1006312

One of my favourite journals, Cancer Research, has a new paper available via open access (i.e. free to the public, thank you AACR), which you can obtain from the link in the Reference section below.

It caught my attention because there was a fascinating symposium on angiogenesis at ESMO this summer with some heavyweight debates from Robert Kerbel (accelerated metastasis) and Lee Ellis (normalisation of tumour vessels) taking different viewpoints on the pros and cons of VEGF inhibition.  I took a few photos of the slides for private study and reflection, as they were going too fast for me to keep up with the key points with unreadable chicken scratch notes, but sadly my iPhone went missing in the exhibit hall less than an hour afterwards before I could download the photos :(.  That said, both sides argued with very compelling data for their perspective that I’m not sure which way I roll on the issue.

In this latest paper, di Tomaso et al., from Boston discuss the concept of recurrent glioblastomas and the tendency to relapse after VEGF therapy.  They noted that there are two current theories for how this might happen:

  1. Switch to VEGF-independent angiogenic pathways
  2. Vessel co-option

They therefore decided to investigate these mechanisms in patients with relapsed glioblastoma using a pan VEGF inhibitor, cediranib.  Now, it should be noted that cediranib (Recentin) is not yet approved and is a small molecule inhibitor, whereas another VEGF inhibitor, bevacizumab (Avastin), is a monoclonal antibody approved for relapsed GBM, so I’m sure why they didn’t use that instead.  It does make extrapolation of the findings a little more tricky though, as you cannot always assume a class effect.

Here are the key findings:

  • Endothelial proliferation and glomeruloid vessels were decreased
  • Vessel diameters and perimeters were reduced to levels comparable to the unaffected contralateral brain hemisphere
  • Tumour endothelial cells expressed molecular markers specific to the blood–brain barrier, indicative of a lack of revascularization despite the discontinuation of therapy
  • Cellular density in the central area of the tumour was lower than in control cases and gradually decreased toward the infiltrating edge, indicative of a change in growth pattern of relapsed GBM after cediranib treatment
  • Cediranib-treated GBMs showed high levels of PDGF-C (platelet-derived growth factor C) and c-Met expression and infiltration by myeloid cells, which may potentially contribute to resistance to anti-VEGF therapy

The authors therefore concluded that:

“rGBMs switch their growth pattern after anti-VEGF therapy—characterized by lower tumor cellularity in the central area, decreased pseudopalisading necrosis, and blood vessels with normal molecular expression and morphology—without a second wave of angiogenesis.”

Commentary:

What intrigued me in particular was not the lack of rebound vascularisation effect but the myeloid component.  Many of you will remember the AACR meeting last September on Molecular Diagnostics in Cancer Therapeutics, where AVEO presented data on their VEGF inhibitor in development and found that the myeloid component acted as a useful biomarker of response for tivozanib in renal cell cancer. You can read more about that here if you missed it.

This raises several interesting questions for me:

  1. Is the myeloid marker that AVEO found with tivozanib actually more useful and applicable to VEGF therapies in general?
  2. Does the myeloid component indicate acute inflammation, as we have seen with respiratory and other diseases?
  3. If PDGF and MET expression rise as resistance sets in, does that suggest logical combination therapies for the treatment of GBM?
  4. How can we better overcome the blood brain barrier, which is a physical impediment to improving outcomes.

Time will tell but clearly the research in relapsed GBM has a-ways to go before we figure out how best to approach it yet.

References:

ResearchBlogging.org di Tomaso, E., Snuderl, M., Kamoun, W., Duda, D., Auluck, P., Fazlollahi, L., Andronesi, O., Frosch, M., Wen, P., Plotkin, S., Hedley-Whyte, E., Sorensen, A., Batchelor, T., & Jain, R. (2011). Glioblastoma Recurrence after Cediranib Therapy in Patients: Lack of “Rebound” Revascularization as Mode of Escape Cancer Research, 71 (1), 19-28 DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-10-2602

Peregrine Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (NASDAQ: PPHM), a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company developing first-in-class monoclonal antibodies for the treatment of cancer and viral infections, today reported interim data from an ongoing Phase II clinical trial of its novel brain cancer therapy Cotara(R). Interim median overall survival was 86 weeks for a cohort of 14 patients with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) treated at first relapse with a single infusion of Cotara. Cotara is a targeted monoclonal antibody linked to a radioisotope that is administered directly into the tumor, destroying the tumor from the inside out, with minimal exposure to healthy tissue.

via ir.peregrineinc.com

I thought this was an interesting announcement this morning from Peregrine. Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is a particularly nasty malignant cancer, with a tendency to aggressiveness and is generally difficult to treat.

Cotara is a novel experimental antibody based on tumour necrosis therapy (TNT). Although these are only early phase II results based on a portion of the full 40 patients expected in the trial, they look encouraging so far.

I suspect the reason for the press release is that the data is being presented at a neurosurgery meeting that's ongoing at the moment in San Francisco.

Definitely a development worth watching, but ultimately, a larger scale phase III trial will be needed before we can be sure whether or not it will be a valuable addition to the armamentarium.

 

At the annual American Association of Cancer Research (AACR) annual meeting earlier this year, Prof Bert Vogelstein presented a fascinating lecture on the critical cancer pathways and how targeting the aberrant signalling may potentially lead to new breakthroughs in treatment.  I've been meaning to write a series on those particular pathways, but things have been very busy since the conference in DC!

It was therefore with great interest that a new paper came out yesterday in the Cancer Research journal entitled, "Gamma-Secretase Inhibitors Enhance Temozolomide Treatment of Human Gliomas by Inhibiting Neurosphere Repopulation and Xenograft Recurrence."

This is also hot on the heels of negative news from Lilly the other week regarding their gamma secretase inhibitor, semagacestat, in Alzheimer's disease. Now, if I were on their oncology team, I'd snap it up and investigate the possibilities in cancer indications, because one's man's poison is another man's nectar: there aren't too many NOTCH inhibitors in oncology development that I know of, and those that are, are still in relatively early phase I development.  More about the pipeline compounds later.

So what's all the fuss about and how does γ-Secretase connect with NOTCH signalling?  Let's take a look at the basic pathway:

Picture 1Source: Cell Signal

NOTCH signalling is an evolutionary pathway that has been shown to regulate cell-fate determination (renewal) during development and also in stem cells.  Without going into too much biochemistry, it essentially enables cell-cell communication and continually enables renewal of adult tissues such as blood, skin, and gut epithelium not only to maintain stem cells in a proliferative, pluripotent, and undifferentiated state.

You can gather from this, therefore, that aberrant NOTCH signalling might also drive or be involved with the dreaded word in cancer: proliferation.  Why?  Because Notch signaling appears to play a role in regulating the cellular actions of VEGF, ie angiogenesis. For those interested in this area, there is a link to a review article on angiogenesis and NOTCH below.

You can also see from the picture above that gamma secretase is a protease that cleaves the NOTCH ligand across the cell membrane.  How then does this relate to gliomas?  According to the study authors:

"Notch activity is upregulated in many gliomas and can be suppressed using gamma-secretase inhibitors (GSI)."

What they found was very interesting:

Basically, in a mouse xenograft model adding a gamma-secretase inhibitor to a standard glioma drug, temozolomide, reduced tumour growth and recurrence and increased survival more effectively than either drug alone.  When you consider that NOTCH may play a role in angiogenesis, these findings make a lot of sense.

What about NOTCH inhibitors in the pipeline?

Merck (MK0752)

This is good news for Merck in particular, since they market temozolomide, a standard treatment for gliomas and have a gamma-secretase inhibitor, MK-0752, in phase I development for breast and pancreatic cancers.  There is also a single agent phase I dose finding trial ongoing with recurrent or refractory CNS tumours, but the new data from Cancer Research may excite their scientists to consider combining MK-0752 with temozolomide in gliomas.  It's certainly worth a shot.

Lilly (semagacestat)

We mentioned Lilly's agent, semagacestat, but as far as I know that is only being tested in Alzheimer's disease although they appear to be testing a NOTCH inhibitor in oncology, as this advanced solid tumour trial suggests.  It may a different compound, however, as the agent is not named.

Roche/Genentech (RO4929097)

The only other NOTCH inhibitor I'm aware of is from Roche/Genentech (RO4929097), which is being tested in a much broader range of cancers than Merck's, including a trial about to start in newly diagnosed gliomas, with temozolomide and a phase II study as a single agent in relapsed/refractory glioblastomas.  Nice work, Roche/Genentech!

If you know of any other NOTCH or gamma secretase inhibitors in development for cancer indications, do drop a note in the comments.  I'm sure Vogelstein would agree that this is a very promising area of research indeed so far.

 

ResearchBlogging.org Gilbert, C., Daou, M., Moser, R., & Ross, A. (2010).  -Secretase Inhibitors Enhance Temozolomide Treatment of Human Gliomas by Inhibiting Neurosphere Repopulation and Xenograft Recurrence Cancer Research DOI: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-10-1378

Cook, K., & Figg, W. (2010). Angiogenesis Inhibitors: Current Strategies and Future Prospects CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 60 (4), 222-243 DOI: 10.3322/caac.20075

4 Comments

Whew, that headline caught my attention just now on the Nationwide Children’s Hospital site while searching for information on medulloblastoma, a form of brain cancer that tends to affect children.

After all the recent brouhaha in the UK over Andrew Wakefield being struck off for professional misconduct relating to his role in the MMR vaccination scandal, tensions may be raised at the idea of using a modified form of the measles virus to treat a childhood brain cancer.

According to the hospital’s press release:

Vaccine strains of measles virus have been used to kill tumor cells in a number of tumor types including one type of adult brain tumor. One vaccine strain of measles, the Edmonston strain, targets the cell surface receptor CD46 to gain entry into susceptible cells. “This preference most likely explains the efficacy of Edmonston strains in killing tumor cells, given the high level of expression of CD46 in multiple tumor types,” said Dr. Raffel. “It is also the reason we chose to explore a modified Edmonston’s strain of measles virus for use in medulloblastoma.”

You learn something new every day.

This news comes hot on the heels of some other research conducted in pediatric brain tumors at St Jude Hospital in Memphis, which reported that:


“Twelve percent of tumors in this study had extra copies of the gene PDGFRA. Researchers reported similar gene-expression patterns associated with high levels of PDGFRA were also found in childhood tumors without extra copies of the gene. Extra copies of PDGFRA were even more common in tumors from children who had received brain irradiation for treatment of earlier cancers.”

As someone who experienced a malignant childhood cancer myself, it’s always gratifying to see research ongoing in this area and improvement in 5-year survival rates.

1 Comment

The inference of transcriptional networks that regulate transitions into physiological or pathological cellular states remains a central challenge in systems biology. A mesenchymal phenotype is the hallmark of tumour aggressiveness in human malignant glioma, but the regulatory programs responsible for implementing the associated molecular signature are largely unknown. Here we show that reverse-engineering and an unbiased interrogation of a glioma-specific regulatory network reveal the transcriptional module that activates expression of mesenchymal genes in malignant glioma. Two transcription factors (C/EBPβ and STAT3) emerge as synergistic initiators and master regulators of mesenchymal transformation. Ectopic co-expression of C/EBPβ and STAT3 reprograms neural stem cells along the aberrant mesenchymal lineage, whereas elimination of the two factors in glioma cells leads to collapse of the mesenchymal signature and reduces tumour aggressiveness. In human glioma, expression of C/EBPβ and STAT3 correlates with mesenchymal differentiation and predicts poor clinical outcome. These results show that the activation of a small regulatory module is necessary and sufficient to initiate and maintain an aberrant phenotypic state in cancer cells.

Glioblastoma is a nasty, aggressive form of cancer but no one has really known why or how to stop it growing, as a long line of therapies have proven largely ineffective.

This fascinating and important study identifies two genes, C/EBP and Stat3, which are active in about 60% of glioblastoma patients.  They appear to work in tandem to turn on many other genes that make brain cells cancerous.

Patients in the study whose tumours showed evidence of both genes being active died within 140 weeks of diagnosis. In comparison, half of patients without activity from these genes were alive after that time, suggesting the two genes may have a role to play as 'master controls' in the disease, driving cells in the brain to become glioblastoma cells.

Of course, future focus will shift to developing effective targeted therapy against the genes to determine whether inactivating them will have any effect on the cancer.

Time will tell. Watch this space!

Posted via web from sally church's posterous

ResearchBlogging.orgCarro, M., Lim, W., Alvarez, M., Bollo, R., Zhao, X., Snyder, E., Sulman, E., Anne, S., Doetsch, F., Colman, H., Lasorella, A., Aldape, K., Califano, A., & Iavarone, A. (2009). The transcriptional network for mesenchymal transformation of brain tumours Nature DOI: 10.1038/nature08712


Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
error: Content is protected !!