A randomised phase II trial of selumetinib vs selumetinib plus temsirolimus for soft-tissue sarcomas.

BACKGROUND: The MEK inhibitor, selumetinib, suppresses soft-tissue sarcoma (STS) cell proliferation in vitro. Mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors possess modest activity against STS; however, resistance develops via MAPK pathway feedback activation. The combination of selumetinib and temsirolimus synergistically inhibits STS cell line growth. Therefore, a randomized phase II trial of selumetinib vs selumetinib plus temsirolimus was conducted. METHODS: Seventy-one adults with advanced STS who received ⩽ 2 prior chemotherapeutics were randomized to selumetinib 75 mg p.o. bid and allowed to crossover upon progression, or to selumetinib 50 mg p.o. bid plus temsirolimus 20 mg i.v. weekly, with primary endpoint of progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: There was no difference in PFS between the two arms for the overall cohort (median 1.9 vs 2.1 months); an improved median PFS was observed in the combination arm (N = 11) over single agent (N = 10) in the prespecified leiomyosarcoma stratum (median 3.7 vs 1.8 months; P = 0.01). Four-month PFS rate was 50% (95% confidence interval 0.19-0.81) with the combination vs 0% with selumetinib alone in the leiomyosarcoma cohort. Most common grade 3/4 adverse events with the combination were mucositis (29%), lymphopenia (26%), neutropenia and anaemia (20% each). CONCLUSIONS: While single-agent selumetinib has no significant activity in STS, the combination may be active for leiomyosarcomas.

A study of radiotherapy modalities combined with continuous 5-FU infusion for locally advanced gastrointestinal malignancies.

AIM: We describe the feasibility of combining infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) with intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT). METHODS: Patients with surgically resectable locally advanced gastrointestinal cancers were treated concurrently during surgery with IORT and a 72 h infusion of 5-FU. Patients without previous external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) were subsequently treated with EBRT (40-50Gy) concurrent with a 21-day continuous infusion of 5-FU. Pancreatic, gastric, duodenal, ampullary, recurrent colorectal, and recurrent anal cancer were included. RESULTS: During IORT/5-FU, no chemotherapy-related grade III or IV hematologic or gastrointestinal toxicity was noted. Post-surgical recovery or wound healing was not affected. One of nine patients who received post-operative radiation required a treatment break. During follow-up, there were more complications in patients with pelvic tumours, especially those with previous radiation. Nine patients have had local and/or local regional recurrences, two of these in the IORT field. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with a combination of IORT and 5-FU followed by EBRT and 5-FU is feasible. However, long-term complications may be increased in previously irradiated recurrent pelvic tumours.

The IFN regulatory factor family participates in regulation of Fas ligand gene expression in T cells.

TCR engagement leads to the transcriptional activation of cytokine genes and activation-induced cell death. Activated T cells undergo apoptosis upon expression and ligation of Fas ligand (FasL) to Fas/APO-1 (CD95) receptor. FasL expression is under the transcriptional regulation of multiple factors. The present study demonstrates that TCR-inducible FasL expression is also under the direct influence of the IFN regulatory factor (IRF) transcription factor family. Deletion and mutagenesis of a putative IRF-1 binding site in the FasL promoter results in deficient expression of FasL. EMSAs demonstrate specific FasL promoter binding by IRF-1 and IRF-2. Forced expression of either IRF-1 or IRF-2 leads to FasL promoter activation in T cells and FasL expression in heterologous cells. Finally, suppression of IRF-1 expression in T cells results in deficient TCR-induced FasL expression. These results confirm that the IRF family participates in the regulation of FasL gene expression.

Soft tissue masses of the chest wall and axilla: has metastatic melanoma been considered?

Isolated axillary and chest wall soft tissue masses are an uncommon presentation of metastatic cancer. The authors present three patients in whom malignant melanomas metastatic to these sites had been misdiagnosed, leading to inappropriate oncologic treatment planning in all three cases. The presumed diagnoses, even after fine-needle aspiration or trucut biopsies, were soft-tissue sarcoma (n = 2) and undifferentiated breast cancer (n = 1). The combination of taking a thorough history and performing proper immunohistochemical analysis of the biopsy material would have suggested the presence of malignant melanoma in all cases. As the disease appeared locoregionally limited in all patients, radical surgical resection with extended lymphadenectomy was performed without significant dysfunction of the upper extremity. One patient agreed to postoperative immunotherapy with interferon-alpha. Two patients are currently alive 17 and 14 months after operation. One patient was found to have systemic recurrence at 5 months, one experienced two isolated local recurrences in a prior operative site that were amenable to reresection and presently has no evidence of disease 12 months after resection, and one patient remains free of disease at 14 months. Clinical presentation, suggested diagnostic workup, and therapeutic implications are discussed to avoid misdiagnoses in this setting of possible clinical presentations of metastatic melanoma.

Unusual interactions between cleavage products of a cis-cleaving hammerhead ribozyme.

We have synthesized and tested a cis-cleaving ribozyme designed to have thermodynamically stable stem-loop structures. This cis-ribozyme cleaves very efficiently in vitro, with a cleavage rate of about 0.5/min. Surprisingly, during the course of in vitro transcription and cleavage of our ribozyme, a product of unusual mobility accumulates and coincides with a sharp decline in the rate of formation of cleavage products. Analyses of this electrophoretic variant demonstrated that it is formed by interactions of the cleavage products. Despite the fact that the products and ribozyme transcript are of identical sequence, the cleavage products interact only with one another and not with the uncleaved precursor. This suggests a significant structural difference between the cleaved and uncleaved ribozyme transcripts. Testing of this cis-ribozyme in both yeast and mammalian cells shows no significant cleavage activity in vivo. We conclude that the structure of the ribozyme flanking sequences is important for optimizing the rate of ribozyme cleavage, but this enhanced rate does not necessarily correlate with enhanced in vivo function.