Pretreatment biopsy analysis of DAB2IP identifies subpopulation of high-risk prostate cancer patients with worse survival following radiation therapy.

Decreased expression of tumor suppressor DAB2IP is linked to aggressive cancer and radiation resistance in several malignancies, but clinical survival data is largely unknown. We hypothesized that pretreatment DAB2IP reduction would predict worse prostate cancer-specific survival (PCSS). Immunohistochemistry of pretreatment biopsies was scored by an expert genitourinary pathologist. Other endpoints analyzed include freedom from biochemical failure (FFBF), castration resistance-free survival (CRFS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS). Seventy-nine patients with NCCN-defined high-risk prostate cancer treated with radiotherapy from 2005 to 2012 at our institution were evaluated. Twenty-eight percent (22/79) of pretreatment biopsies revealed DAB2IP-reduction. The median follow up times were 4.8 years and 5.3 years for patients in the DAB2IP-reduced group and DAB2IP-retained group, respectively. Patients with reduced DAB2IP demonstrated worse outcome compared to patients retaining DAB2IP, including FFBF (4-year: 34 vs. 92%; P < 0.0001), CRFS (4-year: 58 vs. 96%; P = 0.0039), DMFS (4-year: 58 vs. 100%; P = 0.0006), and PCSS (5-year: 83 vs. 100%; P = 0.0102). Univariate analysis showed T stage, N stage, and Gleason score were statistically significant variables. Pretreatment tumor DAB2IP status remained significant in multivariable analyses. This study suggests that about one-fourth of men with high-risk prostate cancer have decreased tumor expression of DAB2IP. This subpopulation with reduced DAB2IP has a suboptimal response and worse malignancy-specific survival following radiation therapy and androgen deprivation. DAB2IP loss may be a genetic explanation for the observed differences in aggressive tumor characteristics and radiation resistance. Further study into improving treatment response and survival in this subpopulation is warranted.

Differential efficacy of combined therapy with radiation and AEE788 in high and low EGFR-expressing androgen-independent prostate tumor models.

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy of combining radiation (XRT) with a dual epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)/vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitor, AEE788, in prostate cancer models with different levels of EGFR expression. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Immunoblotting was performed for EGFR, phosphorylated-EGFR, and phosphorylated-AKT in prostate cancer cells. Clonogenic assays were performed on DU145, PC-3, and human umbilical vein endothelial cells treated with XRT +/- AEE788. Tumor xenografts were established for DU145 and PC-3 on hind limbs of athymic nude mice assigned to four treatment groups: (1) control, (2) AEE788, (3) XRT, and (4) AEE788 + XRT. Tumor blood flow and growth measurements were performed using immunohistochemistry and imaging. RESULTS: AEE788 effectively decreased phosphorylated-EGFR and phosphorylated-AKT levels in DU145 and PC-3 cells. Clonogenic assays showed no radiosensitization for DU145 and PC-3 colonies treated with AEE788 + XRT. However, AEE788 caused decreased proliferation in DU145 cells. AEE788 showed a radiosensitization effect in human umbilical vein endothelial cells and increased apoptosis susceptibility. Concurrent AEE788 + XRT compared with either alone led to significant tumor growth delay in DU145 tumors. Conversely, PC-3 tumors derived no added benefit from combined-modality therapy. In DU145 tumors, a significant decrease in tumor blood flow with combination therapy was shown by using power Doppler sonography and tumor blood vessel destruction on immunohistochemistry. Maldi-spectrometry (MS) imaging showed that AEE788 is bioavailable and heterogeneously distributed in DU145 tumors undergoing therapy. CONCLUSIONS: AEE788 + XRT showed efficacy in vitro/in vivo with DU145-based cell models, whereas PC-3-based models were adequately treated with XRT alone without added benefit from combination therapy. These findings correlated with differences in EGFR expression and showed effects on both tumor cell proliferation and vascular destruction.

Noninvasive assessment of tumor vasculature response to radiation-mediated, vasculature-targeted therapy using quantified power Doppler sonography: implications for improvement of therapy schedules.

OBJECTIVE: Stereotactic radiotherapy (ablative radiation) is a modality that holds considerable promise for effective treatment of intracranial and extracranial malignancies. Although tumor vasculature is relatively resistant to small fractionated doses of ionizing radiation, large ablative doses of ionizing radiation lead to effective demise of the tumor vasculature. The purpose of this study was (1) to noninvasively monitor and compare tumor physiologic parameters in response to ablative radiation treatments and (2) to use these noninvasive parameters to optimize the schedule of administration of radiation therapy. METHODS: Lewis lung carcinoma tumors were implanted into C57BL/6 mice and treated with ablative radiation. The kinetics of change in physiologic parameters of a response to single-dose 20-Gy treatments was measured. Parameters studied included tumor blood flow, apoptosis, and proliferation rates. Serial tumor sections were stained to correlate noninvasive Doppler assessment of tumor blood flow with microvasculature histologic findings. RESULTS: A single administration of 20 Gy led to an incomplete tumor vascular response, with subsequent recovery of tumor blood flow within 4 days after treatment. Sustained reduction of tumor blood flow by administering the successive ablative radiation treatment before tumor blood flow recovery led to a 3-fold tumor growth delay. The difference in tumor volumes at each measurement time point (every 2 days) was statistically significant (P=.016). CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests a rational design of schedule optimization for radiation-mediated, vasculature-directed treatments guided by noninvasive assessment of tumor blood flow levels to ultimately improve the tumor response.