Human bone marrow mesenchymal stem cell-derived exosomes loaded with gemcitabine inhibit pancreatic cancer cell proliferation by enhancing apoptosis

BACKGROUND Pancreatic cancer remains one of the most lethal malignancies,and has limited effective treatment.Gemcitabine(GEM),a chemotherapeutic agent,is commonly used for clinical treatment of pancreatic cancer,but it has characteristics of low drug delivery efficiency and significant side effects.The study tested the hypothesis that human bone marrow mesenchymal stem cell(MSC)-derived exosomes loaded with GEM(Exo-GEM)would have a higher cytotoxicity against human pancreatic cancer cells by enhancing their apoptosis.AIM To investigate the cytotoxicity of MSC-derived Exo-GEM against pancreatic cancer cells in vitro.METHODS Exosomes were isolated from MSCs and characterized by transmission electron microscopy and nanoparticle tracking analysis.Exo-GEM through electroporation,sonication,or incubation,and the loading efficiency was evaluated.The cytotoxicity of Exo-GEM or GEM alone against human pancreatic cancer Panc-1 and MiaPaca-2 cells was assessed by MTT and flow cytometry assays.RESULTS The isolated exosomes had an average size of 76.7 nm.The encapsulation efficacy and loading efficiency of GEM by electroporation and sonication were similar and significantly better than incubation.The cytotoxicity of Exo-GEM against pancreatic cancer cells was stronger than free GEM and treatment with 0.02μM Exo-GEM significantly reduced the viability of both Panc-1 and MiaPaca-2 cells.Moreover,Exo-GEM enhanced the frequency of GEMinduced apoptosis in both cell lines.CONCLUSION Human bone marrow MSC-derived Exo-GEM have a potent cytotoxicity against human pancreatic cancer cells by enhancing their apoptosis,offering a promising drug delivery system for improving therapeutic outcomes.

Simultaneous Dual Selective Targeted Delivery of Two Covalent Gemcitabine Immunochemotherapeutics and Complementary Anti-Neoplastic Potency of [Se]-Methylselenocysteine

The anti-metabolite chemotherapeutic, gemcitabine is relatively effective for a spectrum of neoplastic conditions that include various forms of leukemia and adenocarcinoma/carcinoma. Rapid systemic deamination of gemcitabine accounts for a brief plasma half-life but its sustained administration is often curtailed by sequelae and chemotherapeutic-resistance. A molecular strategy that diminishes these limitations is the molecular design and synthetic production of covalent gemcitabine immunoche-motherapeutics that possess properties of selective “targeted” delivery. The simultaneous dual selective “targeted” delivery of gemcitabine at two separate sites on the external surface membrane of a single cancer cell types represents a therapeutic approach that can increase cytosol chemotherapeutic deposition;prolong chemotherapeutic plasma half-life (reduces administration frequency);minimize innocent exposure of normal tissues and healthy organ systems;and ultimately enhance more rapid and thorough resolution of neoplastic cell populations. Materials and Methods: A light-reactive gemcitabine intermediate synthesized utilizing succinimidyl 4,4-azipentanoate was covalently bound to anti-EGFR or anti-HER2/neu IgG by exposure to UV light (354-nm) resulting in the synthesis of covalent immunoche-motherapeutics, gemcitabine-(C4-amide)-[anti-EGFR] and gemcitabine-(C4-amide)-[anti-HER2/neu]. Cytotoxic anti-neoplastic potency of gemcitabine-(C4-amide)-[anti-EGFR] and gemcitabine-(C4-amide)-[anti-HER2/neu] between?gemcitabine-equivalent concentrations of 10-12 M and 10-6 M was determined utilizing chemotherapeutic-resistant mammary adenocarcinoma (SKRr-3). The organoselenium compound, [Se]-methylselenocysteine was evaluated to determine if it complemented the anti-neoplastic potency of the covalent gemcitabine immunoche-motherapeutics. Results: Gemcitabine-(C4-amide)-[anti-EGFR], gemcitabine-(C4-amide)-[anti-HER2/neu] and the dual simultaneous combination of gemcitabine-(C4-amide)-[anti-EGFR] with gemcitabine-(C4-amide)-[anti-HER2/neu] all had anti-neoplastic cytotoxic potency against mammary adenocarcinoma. Gemcitabine-(C4-amide)-[anti-EGFR] and gemcitabine-(C4-amide)-[anti-HER2/neu] produced progressive increases in anti-neoplastic cytotoxicity that were greatest between gemcitabine-equivalent concentrations of 10-9 M and 10-6 M. Dual simultaneous combinations of gemcitabine-(C4-amide)-[anti-EGFR] with gemcitabine-(C4-amide)-[anti-HER2/neu] produced levels of anti-neoplastic cytotoxicity intermediate between each of the individual covalent gemcitabine immunochemotherapeutics. Total anti-neoplastic cytotoxicity of the dual simultaneous combination of gemcitabine-(C4-amide)-[anti-EGFR] and gemcitabine-(C4-amide)-[anti-HER2/neu] against chemothe-rapeutic-resistant mammary adenocarcinoma (SKBr-3) was substantially higher when formulated with [Se]-methylsele-no-cysteine.

Gemcitabine治疗晚期非小细胞肺癌的临床研究

目的：评价Ｇｅｍｃｉｔａｂｉｎｅ（中文译名：健择）单药及其与顺氯铵铂联合化疗方案治疗ＩＩ、ＩＶ期非小细胞肺癌（ＮＳＣＬＣ）的临床疗效及其不良反应。材料与方法：１健择单药研究：从１９９７年９月至１９９８年５月入选ＩＩ、ＩＶ期ＮＳＣＬＣ病人２１例，以前未接受过任何化疗、放疗。ＩＩ期病人１１例，ＩＶ期病人１０例。健择１０００ｍｇ／ｍ２，第１，８，１５天各注一次，每２８天为一疗程。２健择与顺氯铵铂联合化疗研究：从１９９７年１０月至１９９８年７月入选ＩＩ、ＩＶ期ＮＳＣＬＣ病人４８例，以前未接受过任何化疗、放疗。ＩＩ期病人１９例，ＩＶ期病人２９例。健择１０００ｍｇ／ｍ２，第１，８，１５天各注一次；顺氯铵铂１００ｍｇ／ｍ２，第一天用，每２８天为一疗程。结果：１健择单药研究：可评价疗效的有１９例，６例获部分缓解（ＰＲ），其中２例（１０５％）经４周以上复查证实。总有效率３１５％［９５％ＣＩ，９４％～４５１５％］。全组均可评价不良反应，少数病人发生轻微胃肠道反应、白细胞下降、血红蛋白下降和血小板下降，只有４８％（各１例）患者发生ＩＩ度的恶心呕吐及白细胞下降，有１例患者发生ＩＩ度感染。全组中位生存期６１３月。２?

Treatment of Primary Liver Cancer with Postoperative After-Loading Radiotherapy and Gemcitabine

Objective： To evaluate the curative effectiveness of postoperative after-loading radiotherapy with the use of gemcitabine in 22 patients with primary liver cancer. Methods： From Oct. 1999 to Dec. 2001, 22 patients with primary liver cancer underwent postoperative after-loading radiotherapy 3-10 days after hepatectomy and chemotherapy using gemcitabine （1400 mg every week for 3 weeks, repeated after one week interval, total cycles were 6） and compared with 22 cases of sole hepatectomy. Three-six catheters were placed for irradiation after hepatectomy. The single-dose of after-loading radiotherapy was 10 Gy, 24 sessions per person. Results＇. The rate of AFP negative-reversion was 100% （17/17） in the treated group, higher than in control group （62.5%, 10/16, P〈0.05）. In the treated group, the 1-year relapse rate, metastasis rate and survival rate were 18.2% （4/22）, 0 and 100% （22/22） respectively, while in the control group they were 45.5% （10/22）, 13.6% （3/22） and 77.3% （17/22） respectively. There were significant differences between the two groups in relapse rate, metastasis rate and survival rate within a year （P〈0.05）. Conclusion： Postoperative after-loading radiotherapy with gemcitabine is an effective way for the treatment of primary liver cancer.

过表达Plk-1对gemcitabine诱导的胰腺癌细胞化疗敏感性的影响

目的观察Plk-1基因过表达对gemcitabine诱导胰腺癌细胞AsPC-1化疗敏感性的影响。方法①将携带有人外源性Plk-1基因的真核表达质粒转染AsPC-1细胞系设为处理组,转染空载体设为对照组,无处理组设为空白组,转染24 h后,提取细胞总RNA和总蛋白,利用RT-PCR法及Western blot鉴定AsPC-1细胞内Plk-1基因和蛋白表达水平。②采用流式细胞术检测转染组细胞凋亡的改变。③不同浓度gemcitabine作用于转染细胞,MTT法测定转染48 h后细胞增殖能力。结果①测序结果表明成功的从AsPC-1细胞总RNA中扩增Plk-1基因。RT-PCR结果表明:未转染组AsPC-1细胞组、转染空载体pcDNA3.1组及pcDNA3.1/Plk-1组24 h各组细胞内Plk-1 mRNA相对量分别为(2.14±0.16)、(2.18±0.15)、(2.58±0.18),转染pcDNA3.1/Plk-1组与其他各组相比,差异有高度统计学意义(P<0.01)。Western blot结果显示:未转染组AsPC-1细胞组、转染空载体pcDNA3.1及pcDNA3.1/Plk-1组24 h各组细胞内Plk-1基因的蛋白表达水平为(0.989±0.018)、(1.022±0.021)、(1.243±0.143),转染pcDNA3.1/Plk-1组与其他各组相比,差异有高度统计学意义(P<0.01)。②在gemcitabine作用下,pcDNA3.1/Plk-1转染组细胞凋亡率明显低于未转染组及空载体转染组,差异有高度统计学意义(P<0.01)。③AsPC-1/Plk-1转染组细胞的生长抑制率亦明显高于未转染组及空载体转染组,差异有高度统计学意义(P<0.01)。结论胞浆过表达Plk-1活性分子可明显降低gemcitabine诱导的AsPC-1细胞凋亡,增强其对化疗药物的耐受性。

Treatment of Unresectable Carcinoma of Pancreas with ^(125)I Implantation and ^(125)I Plus Gemcitabine

Objective: To study the role of 125 I and 125 I plus gemcitabine (GEM) in treatment of unresectable carcinoma of pancreas. Methods: From April 2000 to April 2003, 38 untreated patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) were collected and randomized into two groups: Arm A 125 I (18 patients) and Arm B 125 I+GEM (20 patients). Eligibility criteria were: cytologically and pathologically proven pancreatic carcinoma, Karnofsky performance status (kps) 60 80, age 18 75 years, adequate hematological, renal and liver function, and controllable pain. Arm A patients were treated with 125 I implants. Arm B patients started chemotherapy within 10 14 d post operatively following the implant procedure. Chemotherapy doses were as follows: GEM 1 000 mg/m 2 weekly × 3 followed by 1 week of rest for 3 cycles. In addition, all patients underwent laparotomy and surgical staging. The surgical procedures performed were biopsy, gastric bypass and biliary bypass. The total activity and number of seeds used were as recommended by Anderson. The mean activity, minimal peripheral dose (MPD), and volume of implants were 20 mCi, 14 000 cGy, and 53 cm 3, respectively. Results: Overall response rate (CR+PR) in Arm A was 37.6% and in Arm B it was 44.5% ( P >0.05). PR median duration in Arm A was 6.7 months and in Arm B it was 4.8 months ( P <0.05). Clinical benefit response was experienced by 11.7 % of Arm A compared with 42.1% of Arm B ( P <0.05). The incidences of hematological toxicity (such as neutropenia) between Arm A and Arm B were 5.8% and 21.1%, respectively ( P >0.05). The survival rates of 12 and 24 month were 32.5%, 16.3% for Arm A and 61%, 38.7% for Arm B ( P =0.04). The rate of complication of Arm A was lower than that of Arm B without statistical significance. Conclusion: To some extent, 125 I or 125 I plus GEM is able to lead to a moderate objective response for LAPC with obstructive jaundice on the base of biliary bypass or/and gastric bypass, but 125 I plus GEM is more effective than 125 I in improvement of the quality of life and survival rate in patients with LAPC.

N-gamboyl Gemcitabine Inhibits Tumor Cells Proliferation and Migration

Gambogic acid(GA) is a natural substance with a good antitumor effect, but it is too lipophilic to be metabolized and excreted, thus accumulating in the body. Gemcitabine(GEM), one of the first-line antitumor drugs, has high hydrophilicity, which greatly shortens its half-life in vivo. We previously reported a compound named N-gamboyl gemcitabine(GAG), derived from the condensation of GEM and GA, whose hydrophilicity is better than GA and stability is better than GEM. Here, the antitumor performance of GAG was investigated for the first time by using several common tumor cell lines as tumor models. The results of in vitro study showed that GAG significantly inhibited the proliferation and migration of the tumor cells. The IC50 values of GAG for the tumor cells were lower than those of GEM and GA. The present study suggests that GAG has a promising potential to be developed into a broad-spectrum antitumor drug.

Efficacy and safety of gemcitabine-oxaliplatin combined with huachansu in patients with advanced gallbladder carcinoma

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine-oxaliplatin (GEMOX) combined with huachansu (cinobufagin) injection treatment in patients with locally advanced or metastatic gallbladder carcinoma (GBC), and to assess the quality of life (QOL) of such patients. METHODS: Twenty-fi ve patients with locally advanced or metastatic GBC were treated with intravenous gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2) over 30 min on days 1 and 8, 2 h infusion of oxaliplatin (120 mg/m2) on day 1, and 2-3 h infusion of huachansu (20 mL/m2) on days -3-11, every 3-4 wk. Treatment was continued until occurrence of unacceptable toxicity or disease progression. QOL of patients was assessed by the EORTC QLQ-C30 at baseline, at the end of the fi rst, third and sixth chemotherapy cycles, and 1 mo after the treatment. RESULTS: Among the 25 patients with a median age of 64 years (range 42-78 years), 23 were evaluable in the study. A total of 137 cycles of therapy were performed and the median cycle was 5 (range 1-8) per patient. Out of the 23 patients whose response couldbe evaluated, 8 partial responses (PR) were observed (34.8%), while 7 patients (30.4%) demonstrated a stable disease (SD). The disease control rate was 65.2%. Progression of cancer was observed in 8 (34.8%) patients. The median progression-free and overall survival time was 5.8 mo (95% CI: 4.5-7.1 mo) and 10.5 mo, respectively. The therapy was well tolerated, with moderate myelosuppression as the main toxicity. Anemia grade 2 was seen in 16.0%, neutropenia grade 3 in 8.0% and thrombocytopenia grade 3 in 24.0% of patients, respectively. Non-hematologic toxicity ranged from mild to moderate. No death occurred due to toxicity. The QOL of patients was improved after chemotherapy, and the scores of QOL were increased by 10 to 20 points. CONCLUSION: GEMOX combined with huachansu (cinobufagin) injection is well tolerated, effective, thus improving the QOL of patients with advanced GBC.

Does gemcitabine-based combination therapy improve the prognosis of unresectable pancreatic cancer?

AIM:To assess whether gemcitabine-based combination therapy improves the prognosis of unresectable pancreatic cancer compared with gemcitabine treatment alone.METHODS:A quantitative up-to-date meta-analysis was undertaken to investigate the efficacy of gemcitabine-based combination treatment compared with gemcitabine monotherapy in locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer.Inclusion was limited to highquality randomized clinical trials.RESULTS:Twenty-six studies were included in the present analysis,with a total of 8808 patients recruited.The studies were divided into four subgroups based on the different kinds of cytotoxic agents,including platinum,fluoropyrimidine,camptothecin and targeted agents.Patients treated with gemcitabine monotherapy had significantly lower objective response rate [risk ratio(RR),0.72;95% confidence interval(CI):0.63-0.83;P < 0.001],and lower 1-year overall survival(RR,0.90;95%CI:0.82-0.99;P = 0.04).Gemcitabine monotherapy caused fewer complications,including fewer grade 3-4 toxicities:including vomiting(RR,0.75;95%CI:0.62-0.89;P = 0.001),diarrhea(RR,0.66;95%CI:0.49-0.89;P = 0.006),neutropenia(RR,0.88;95%CI:0.72-1.06;P = 0.18),anemia(RR,0.96;95%CI:0.82-1.12;P = 0.60),and thrombocytopenia(RR,0.76;95%CI:0.60-0.97;P = 0.03) compared with gemcitabine combination therapies.CONCLUSION:Gemcitabine combination therapy provides a modest improvement of survival,but is associated with more toxicity compared with gemcitabine monotherapy.

Nedaplatin/Gemcitabine Versus Carboplatin/Gemcitabine in Treatment of Advanced Non-small Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Objective： To evaluate the efficacy and safety of nedaplatin/gemcitabine （NG） and carboplatin/gemcitabine （CG） in the management of untreated advanced non-small cell lung cancer （NSCLC）. Methods： Sixty-two patients with previously untreated advanced NSCLC were recruited between June 2006 and November 2007. Subjects were randomly assigned to the NG arm （n=30） and the CG arm （n=32）. Only patients （24 and 25 in the NG and CG arms, respectively） who completed 〉2 chemotherapy cycles were included in the data analysis. The primary outcome measure was the objective response rate （ORR）. The secondary outcome measures included progression-free survival （PFS）, overall survival （OS） and adverse events. Results： There were no statistically significant differences in the efficacy measures （ORR, P=0.305; median PFS, P=0.298, median OS, P=0.961） or in the major adverse events （grade 3/4 neutropenia, P=0.666; grade 3/4 anemia, P=0.263; grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia, P=0.222） between the two treatment arms. However, there was a trend towards higher ORR （37.5% vs. 24.0%）, longer PFS （6.0 vs. 5.0 months）, and less adverse events in the NG arm. Conclusion： NG regimen seems to be superior over CG regimen for advance NSCLS, but further investigation is needed to validate this superiority.

Meta-analysis on inoperable pancreatic cancer: A comparison between gemcitabine-based combination therapy and gemcitabine alone

AIM: To compare gemcitabine-based combination therapy and gemcitabine (GEM) alone in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (APCa) through meta- analysis. METHODS: MEDLINE and EMBASE searches were supplemented by information from trial registers of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for GEM-based combination therapy and GEM alone for APCa. A quantitative meta-analysis was carried out by two reviewers based on the inclusion criteria from all available RCTs. The meta-analysis involved overall survival (OS), objective remission rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR), time to progress/progress free survival (TTP/PFS) and toxicity. RESULTS: The meta-analysis included 22 RCTs. There was significant improvement in the GEM combination group with regard to the 6-mo survival rate (RD = 0.04, 95% CI 0.01-0.06, P = 0.008), 1-year survival rate (RD = 0.03, 95% CI 0.01-0.05, P = 0.01), ORR (RD = 0.04, 95% CI 0.01-0.07, P = 0.02), CBR (RD = 0.10, 95% CI 0.02-0.17, P = 0.01) and 6-mo TTP/PFS (RD = 0.07, 95% CI 0.04-0.10, P < 0.00001). However, the Grade 3-4 toxicity set by WHO was higher for the GEM combination group for neutropenia (RD = 0.05, 95% CI 0.01-0.10, P = 0.02), thrombocytopenia (RD = 0.05, 95% CI 0.02-0.08, P = 0.002) and vomiting/nausea (RD = 0.03, 95% CI 0.00-0.05, P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: GEM-based combination therapy may improve the overall survival and palliation in optimalpatients with APCa as compared with GEM alone.

Weekly albumin-bound paclitaxel/cisplatin versus gemcitabine/cisplatin as first-line therapy for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer:A phase II open-label clinical study

Objective: The aim of this trial was to compare both the efficacy and the safety of a weekly nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel(nab-paclitaxel) plus cisplatin vs. gemcitabine plus cisplatin in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer(NSCLC).Methods: A total of 84 participants received either 100 mg/m^2 nab-paclitaxel each week on d 1, 8 and 15 of a 28 day cycle, as well as cisplatin 75 mg/m^2 on d 1 every three weeks(nab-TP arm); or gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m^2 on d 1 and 8, plus cisplatin 75 mg/m^2 on d 1 every three weeks(GP arm). The primary end point was progression-free survival(PFS). The secondary end points were overall response rate(ORR) and overall survival(OS).Results: According to our analysis, the median PFS was 4.8 months for the nab-TP arm vs. 5.2 months for the GP arm(P=0.55). Analysis showed the median OS was 14.6 months for participants who were in the nab-TP arm vs. 15.1 months for those in the GP arm(P=0.94). Besides, nab-TP showed OS advantages over GP in patients harboring epidermal growth factor receptor(EGFR) mutation(26.7 vs. 15.3 months, P=0.046) and patients with a performance status of 0(23.5 vs. 14.7 months, P=0.020). It was found that incidences of drug-related grade 3 or 4 toxicities were comparable between the two treatment arms.Conclusions: Therefore, it can be seen that weekly nab-TP treatment has a similar efficacy and tolerability to GP treatment for patients who are undergoing their first-line treatment for NSCLC. It could be that survival differences among platinum doublets in the context of both EGFR mutation and performance status have the potential to be the basis for our further clinical trials.

Synergetic anticancer effect of combined gemcitabine and photodynamic therapy on pancreatic cancer in vivo

AIM： To investigate the anti-tumor effects of combined cytotoxic drug （gemcitabine） and photodynamic therapy （PDT） on human pancreatic cancer xenograft in nude mice.METHODS： Human pancreatic cancer cell line SW1990 was used in the investigation of the in vivo effect of combined gemcitabine and PDT on human pancreatic cancer xenograft in mice. Sixty mice were randomly allocated into a control group （without treatment）, photosensitizer treatment group （2 mg/kg photosan, without illumination）, chemotherapy group （50 mg/kg gemcitabine i.p.）, PDT group （2 mg/kg photosan ＋ laser irradiation） and combined treatment group （photosan ＋ chemotherapy）, with 12 mice in each group. Tumor size was measured twice every week. Anti-tumor activity in different groups was evaluated by tumor growth inhibition （TGI）RESULTS： No significant anti-tumor effect was observed either in photosensitizer treatment group or in chemotherapy group. PDT led to necrosis in cancer lesions and significantly reduced tumor volume compared with photosensitizer on day 6 and at the following time points after initialization of therapy （0.24 ± 0.15-0.49 ± 0.08 vs 0.43 ± 0.18-1.25± 0.09, P 〈 0.05）. PDT significantly reduced tumor volume in combined treatment group compared with photosensitizer treatment group （0.12 ± 0.07-0.28 ± 0.22 vs 0.39 ± 0.15-2.20 ± 0.12, P 〈 0.05）, small dose chemotherapy group （0.12 ± 0.07-0.28 ± 0.12 vs 0.32 ± 0.14-1.16 ± 0.08, P 〈 0.05） and control group （0.12 ± 0.07-0.28 ± 0.12 vs 0.43 ± 0.18-1.25 ± 0.09, P 〈 0.05）. TGI was higher in the combined treatment group （82.42%） than in the PDT group （58.18%）.CONCLUSION： PDT has a significant anti-tumor effect, which is maintained for a short time and can be significantly enhanced by small doses of gemcitabine.

Propofol induces apoptosis and increases gemcitabine sensitivity in pancreatic cancer cells in vitro by inhibition of nuclear factor-κ B activity

AIM:To investigate the effect of propofol on human pancreatic cells and the molecular mechanism of propofol action.METHODS:We used the human pancreatic cancer cell line MIAPaCa-2 for in vitro studies measuring growth inhibition and degree of apoptotic cell death induced by propofol alone,gemcitabine alone,or propofol followed by gemcitabine.All experiments were conducted in triplicate and carried out on three or more separate occasions.Data were means of the three or more independent experiments±SE.Statistically significant differences were determined by two-tailed unpaired Student’s t test and defined as P<0.05.RESULTS:Pretreatment of cells with propofol for 24 h followed by gemcitabine resulted in 24%-75% growth inhibition compared with 6%-18%when gemcitabine was used alone.Overall growth inhibition was directly correlated with apoptotic cell death.We also showed that propofol potentiated gemcitabine-induced killing by downregulation of nuclear factor-κB(NF-κB).In contrast,NF-κB was upregulated when pancreatic cancer cells were exposed to gemcitabine alone,suggesting a potential mechanism of acquired chemoresistance.CONCLUSION:Inactivation of the NF-κB signaling pathway by propofol might abrogate gemcitabineinduced activation of NF-κB,resulting in chemosensitization of pancreatic tumors to gemcitabine.

Neoadjuvant sorafenib combined with gemcitabine plus oxaliplatin in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

This paper reports the first case of a patient with hepatocellular carcinoma with lymph node metastasis treated by sorafenib combined with gemcitabine plus oxaliplatin,with a partial response and normalization of α fetoprotein,which allowed curative surgery.The potential synergy between these three drugs needs to be confirmed,and is currently being investigated in a randomized phase Ⅱ trial.

Clinical efficacy of gemcitabine and cisplatin-based transcatheter arterial chemoembolization combined with radiotherapy in hilar cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND Radical surgical resection is regarded as the best treatment for hepatic hilar cholangiocarcinoma. However, 60%-70% of patients have lost the chance of surgery at the time of diagnosis. Simple biliary stent or drainage tube placement may fail in a short time due to tumor invasion or overgrowth, bile accumulation, or biofilm formation. Effective palliative treatments to extend the effective drainage time are of great significance for improving the quality of life of patients and changing the prognosis of patients. AIM To investigate the clinical efficacy of gemcitabine and cisplatin-based transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE) combined with radiotherapy in hilar cholangiocarcinoma.METHODS A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients clinically diagnosed with hilar cholangiocarcinoma from June 2014 to January 2017 at the Liaoning Provincial Cancer Hospital. Patients were evaluated by specialists, and those who were not suitable for surgery or unwilling to undergo surgery and met the inclusion criteria were included in the study. There were a total of 72 patients (34 males and 38 females) with an average age of 59.9 years (range, 40-72 years). According to percutaneous transhepatic biliary angiography and the patients’ wishes, stent implantation or biliary drainage tube implantation was used to relieve biliary obstruction. The patients were divided into either a control group or a combined treatment group according to their follow-up treatment. The control group consisted of a total of 35 patients who received simple biliary drainage tube placement and biliary stent implantation (7 patients with bilateral stents and 6 with a unilateral stent) and 22 patients receiving biliary drainage tube placement alone. The combined treatment group received TACE and extracorporeal radiotherapy after biliary drainage or biliary stent implantation and consisted of a total of 37 patients, including 21 patients receiving combined treatment after biliary stent placement (14 patients with bilateral stents and 7 with a unilateral stent) and 16 undergoing combined therapy after implanting the biliary drainage tube. In the combination treatment group, the TACE chemotherapy regimen employed gemcitabine and cisplatin, and the embolic agent was iodized oil. A particular dose was determined according to the patient's body surface area and the tumor staining indicated by DSA. In vitro radiotherapy was performed with intensity-modulated radiotherapy or threedimensional conformal radiotherapy at an average dose of 48.3 Gy. Both groups were followed from stent implantation or drainage tube implantation until the patient quitted or died. The median length of follow-up observation was 13 mo. The differences in overall survival time and the effect of different jaundice reducing methods (single stent, double stent, or biliary drainage) on the patency time and survival time of biliary stents were compared between the two groups;the related factors affecting overall survival time were analyzed. RESULTS The median survival time of the control group was 10.5 mo;the median survival time of patients with biliary stent implantation and those with percutaneous biliary drainage was 9.6 mo and 11.4 mo, respectively, and there was no statistically significant difference between them. The median survival time of the combined treatment group was 20.0 mo, which was significantly higher than that of the control group (P < 0.05). Among patients in the combined treatment group, the median survival time of patients who underwent biliary stent implantation and those who accepted percutaneous biliary drainage before the combination therapy was 19.5 mo and 20.1 mo, respectively, and there was no significant difference between them. In the combination treatment group, the mean time of median stent patency was 15.6 mo, which was significantly higher than that of the control group (7.0 mo;P < 0.05). The independent factors affecting survival time included age, whether to receive combination therapy, percutaneous biliary drainage tube implantation, and Bismuth-Corlette classification as type IV. CONCLUSION Gemcitabine and cisplatin-based TACE combined with radiotherapy can prolong the survival of patients with hilar cholangiocarcinoma. Independent predictors of survival include selection of combination therapy, Bismuth-Corlette classification as type IV, selection of percutaneous biliary drainage tube implantation, and age.

hENT1 expression is predictive of gemcitabine outcome in pancreatic cancer: A systematic review

High human equilibrative nucleoside transporter 1(hENT1)-expression has shown a survival benefit in pancreatic cancer patients treated with gemcitabine in several studies.The aim of this systematic review was to summarize the results and try to assess the predictive value of hENT1 for determining gemcitabine outcome in pancreatic cancer.Relevant articles were obtained from PubMed,Embase and Cochrane databases.Studies evaluating hENT1-expression in pancreatic tumor cells from patients treated with gemcitabine were selected.Outcome measures were overall survival,disease-free survival(DFS),toxicity and response rate.The database searches identified 10 studies that met the eligibility criteria,and a total of 855 patients were included.Nine of 10 studies showed a statistically significant longer overall survival in univariate analyses in patients with high hENT1-expression compared to those with low expression.In the 7 studies that reported DFS as an outcome measure,6 had statistically longer DFS in the high hENT1 groups.Both toxicity and response rate were reported in only 2 articles and it was therefore hard to draw any major conclusions.This review provides evidence that hENT1 is a predictive marker for pancreatic cancer patients treated with gemcitabine.Some limitations of the review have to be taken into consideration,the majority of the included studies had a retrospective design,and there was no standardized scoring protocol for hENT1-expression.

Elucidation of the relationship of BNIP3 expression to gemcitabine chemosensitivity and prognosis

AIM: To evaluate the significance of BNIP3 in the pathogenesis of pancreatic cancer, we analyzed the relationship between the expression of BNIP3 and survival rate of the patients with pancreatic cancer, or chemosensitivities in pancreatic cancer cell lines, particularly for gemcitabine, the first-line anti-tumor drug for pancreatic cancer. METHODS: To compare the expression level of BNIP3 with the resistance to gemcitabine, eight pancreatic cancer cell lines were subjected to gemcitabine treatment and the quantitative real-time RT-PCR method was used to evaluate BNIP3 expression. Immunohistochemical analysis was also performed using 22 pancreatic cancer specimens to study relationship between BNIP3 expression and survival rate. RESULTS: Although no significantly positive association between BNIP3 mRNA level and gemcitabine chemosensitivity was observed, pancreatic cancer cell lines that were sensitive to gemcitabine treatment tended to show high levels of BNIP3 expression. The converse, an absence of BNIP3 expression, was not correlated with gemcitabine resistance. We further compared the BNIP3 expression profiles of resected primary pancreaticcancer specimens with the prognosis of the patients, and found a tendency of favorable prognosis and low BNIP3 expression. CONCLUSION: High levels of BNIP3 expression cannot be used as one of the predicting factors for gemcitabine chemosensitivity, and some yet to be known factors will have to fill the gap for the accurate prediction of pancreatic cancer chemosensitivity to gemcitabine. However, BNIP3 expression may have an impact on prediction of prognosis of patients with pancreatic cancer.

Oncogenic ADAM28 induces gemcitabine resistance and predicts a poor prognosis in pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND Pancreatic cancer is a major cause of cancer-related death,with a 5-year overall survival rate being below 5%.The main causes of poor prognosis in pancreatic cancer include easy metastasis,high recurrence rate,and robust drug resistance.Gemcitabine is a first-line drug for patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer.However,due to drug resistance,the clinical effect is not satisfactory.ADAM28 is reported as a tumor promoter in some cancers,but its role in pancreatic cancer and gemcitabine chemoresistance in pancreatic cancer has not been elucidated.AIM To identify if ADAM28 can act as an important target to reverse the gemcitabine drug resistance in pancreatic cancer.METHODS RNA-sequence analysis was applied to explore the potential targets involved in the gemcitabine of pancreatic cancer.SW1990 pancreatic cancer cells were treated with an increased dose of gemcitabine,and the mRNA levels of ADAM28 were evaluated by RT-PCR.The protein and mRNA levels of ADAM28 were confirmed in the gemcitabine resistant and parallel SW1990 cells.The ADAM28 expression was also assessed in TCGA and GEO databases,and the results were confirmed in the collected tumor and adjacent normal tissues.The overall survival(OS)rate and relapse-free survival(RFS)rate of pancreatic cancer patients with high ADAM28 level and low ADAM28 level in TCGA were evaluated with Kaplan-Meier Plotter.Furthermore,the OS rate was calculated in pancreatic cancer patients with high tumor mutation burden(TMB)and low TMB.CCK-8 assay was used to examine the effect of ADAM28 on the viability of SW1990 cells.The ADAM28 and its co-expressed genes were analyzed in the cBioPortal for cancer genomics and subjected to GSEA pathway analysis.The correlations of ADAM28 with GSTP1,ABCC1,GSTM4,and BCL2 were analyzed based on TCGA data on pancreatic cancer.RESULTS RNA-sequence analysis identified that ADAM28 was overexpressed in gemcitabine-resistant cells,and gemcitabine treatment could induce the expression of ADAM28.The mRNA and protein levels of ADAM28 were elevated in gemcitabine-resistant SW1990 cells compared with parallel cells.Also,the expression of ADAM28 was upregulated in pancreatic tumor tissues against normal pancreatic tissues.Notably,ADAM28 was highly expressed in the classical type than in the basal tumor type.Furthermore,the high expression of ADAM28 was associated with low OS and RFS rates.Interestingly,the high levels of ADAM28 was associated with a significantly lower OS rate in the high TMB patients,but not in the low TMB patients.Moreover,overexpression of ADAM28 could reduce the cell viability inhibition by gemcitabine,and knockdown of ADAM28 could enhance the proliferation inhibition by gemcitabine.The GSEA analysis showed that ADAM28 was related to the regulation of drug metabolism,and ADAM28 was significantly positively correlated with GSTP1,ABCC1,GSTM4,and BCL2.CONCLUSION This study demonstrates that ADAM28 is overexpressed in pancreatic cancer,and closely involved in the regulation of gemcitabine resistance.Overexpression of ADAM28 is a novel prognostic biomarker in pancreatic cancer.