A Comparison and Safety Evaluation of Micellar versus Standard Vitamin D3 Oral Supplementation in a Randomized, Double-Blind Human Pilot Study.

The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate and compare bioavailability and safety of two Vitamin D3 formulations (softgels) in healthy adults, at single daily doses of 1000 and 2500 IU, over a 60-day period. A total of 69 participants were initially screened for eligibility in a double-blind randomized study with a four-arm parallel design; 35 participants were randomized to treatment groups: (1) standard Vitamin D3 1000 IU (STD1000), (2) micellar Vitamin D3 1000 IU (LMD1000), (3) standard Vitamin D3 2500 IU (STD2500), and (4) micellar Vitamin D3 2500 IU (LMD2500). Serum Vitamin D concentrations were determined through calcifediol [25(OH)D] at baseline (=before treatment), at day 5, 10, and 15 (=during treatment), at day 30 (=end of treatment), and at day 45 and 60 (=during follow-up/post treatment). Safety markers and minerals were evaluated at baseline and at day 30 and day 60. The pharmacokinetic parameters with respect to iAUC were found to be significantly different between LMD1000 vs. STD1000: iAUC(5-60): 992 ± 260 vs. 177 ± 140 nmol day/L; p < 0.05, suggesting up to 6 times higher Vitamin D3 absorption of LMD when measured incrementally. During follow-up, participants in the LMD1000 treatment group showed approx. 7 times higher Vitamin D3 concentrations than the STD1000 group (iAUC(30-60): 680 ± 190 vs. 104 ± 91 nmol day/L; p < 0.05). However, no significant differences were found between the pharmacokinetics of the higher dosing groups STD2500 and LMD2500. No significant changes in serum 1,25(OH)2D concentrations or other biochemical safety markers were detected at day 60; no excess risks of hypercalcemia (i.e., total serum calcium > 2.63 mmol/L) or other adverse events were identified. LMD, a micellar delivery vehicle for microencapsulating Vitamin D3 (LipoMicel®), proved to be safe and only showed superior bioavailability when compared to standard Vitamin D at the lower dose of 1000 IU. This study has clinical trial registration: NCT05209425.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over trial to evaluate the effect of EstroSense® on 2-hydroxyestrone:16α-hydroxyestrone ratio in premenopausal women.

OBJECTIVES: Some estrogen metabolites are associated with increased breast cancer risk, while others are protective. Research efforts have focused on modifiable factors, including bioactive compounds found in food or supplements, promoting estrogen profiles with anti-cancer properties. EstroSense® is a nutraceutical product with bioactive compounds, including Indole-3-carbinol and green-tea catechins, which may favourably affect estrogen profiles. This study was conducted to determine if EstroSense use, compared to placebo, promotes a higher urinary 2-hydroxyestrone:16α-hydroxyestrone ratio (2-OHE1:16α-OHE1), a biomarker associated with a lowered risk of breast cancer. METHODS: A total of 148 premenopausal women were recruited from British Columbia, Canada to participate in a randomized, double-blind, cross-over, multicentre, placebo-controlled study in which women were randomized to a treatment sequence that consisted of either EstroSense®, followed by placebo or vice-versa. The women were instructed to consume three capsules per day of EstroSense® or the placebo for three menstrual cycles (∼12 weeks). The primary outcome was the measurement of 2-OHE1:16α-OHE1 in casual samples at baseline and after each treatment phase. RESULTS: After 12 weeks of intervention, the mean (95% CI) urinary 2-OHE1:16α-OHE1 was 4.55 (2.69, 6.42) (p<0.001) higher following EstroSense than placebo adjusted for baseline values. CONCLUSIONS: EstroSense use led to markedly higher urinary 2-OHE1:16α-OHE1 than the placebo, a biomarker associated with a lower risk of breast cancer. REGISTRATION: http://clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02385916).

Dendritic cell immunotherapy for stage IV melanoma.

Active boosting of the antitumour immune response of patients with solid malignancies has been tested in a large number of trials. Isolated complete clinical responses have been reported, however, they have not been replicated in subsequent studies. We recently reported objective clinical responses to a dendritic cell/irradiated autologous tumour cell 'vaccine' in patients with distant metastatic (stage IV) melanoma. Here we describe our experience in a second cohort of patients with stage IV melanoma, using this dendritic cell-based immunotherapy in a cryopreserved format. Of 46 patients enrolled into the study, three had complete remission of all detectable disease, and a further three had partial clinical responses. These data confirm that dendritic cell-based immunotherapy has potential as a therapy in a limited number of patients with stage IV melanoma. To our knowledge, this is the first demonstration that cryopreserved dendritic cells can elicit complete clinical responses in patients with advanced cancer. Our observations support randomized controlled trials to validate the findings.

Immunological characteristics correlating with clinical response to immunotherapy in patients with advanced metastatic melanoma.

Current treatment options for advanced metastatic melanoma are limited to experimental regimen that provide poor survival outcomes. Immunotherapy is a promising alternative and we recently reported a clinical trial in which 6 out of 19 patients enrolled had objective clinical responses to a fully autologous melanoma/dendritic cell vaccine. The mechanism of the vaccine is not well understood, but we hypothesized that general immunocompetence may be a determinant of clinical response. We therefore examined the immune status of an expanded series of 21 patients who displayed varying clinical responses to the melanoma/dendritic cell vaccine. Immunocompetence was assessed using in vitro assays of lymphocyte function: survival, proliferation and cytokine responses to mitogen stimulation as well as T-cell receptor zeta expression and lymphocyte subset analysis. Although lymphocytes from patients mostly performed comparably to age-matched and sex-matched controls, in some assays we identified significant differences between complete clinical responders and other patients, both before and following vaccination. Surprisingly, before vaccination, only lymphocytes from clinical responder patients showed impaired in vitro survival. Following vaccination, T lymphocyte survival improved and cells recovered their ability to produce the Th1-associated cytokines TNF and IFN-gamma in response to anti-CD3 stimulation in vitro. No increase in Th1 cytokine production was observed in lymphocytes from patients who experienced partial clinical responses or progressive disease. We conclude that, before vaccination, patients who go on to have complete responses have immune characteristics suggestive of high cell turnover and low Th1-associated cytokine production, and that these can be reversed with vaccination. These results have potential implications for future immunotherapeutic strategies.

Durable complete clinical responses in a phase I/II trial using an autologous melanoma cell/dendritic cell vaccine.

Advanced metastatic melanoma is incurable by standard treatments, but occasionally responds to immunotherapy. Recent trials using dendritic cells (DC) as a cellular adjuvant have concentrated on defined peptides as the source of antigens, and rely on foreign proteins as a source of help to generate a cell-mediated immune response. This approach limits patient accrual, because currently defined, non-mutated epitopes are restricted by a small number of human leucocyte antigens. It also fails to take advantage of mutated epitopes peculiar to the patient's own tumour, and of CD4+ T lymphocytes as potential effectors of anti-tumour immunity. We therefore sought to determine whether a fully autologous DC vaccine is feasible, and of therapeutic benefit. Patients with American Joint Cancer Committee stage IV melanoma were treated with a fully autologous immunotherapy consisting of monocyte-derived DC, matured after culture with irradiated tumour cells. Of 19 patients enrolled into the trial, sufficient tumour was available to make treatments for 17. Of these, 12 received a complete priming phase of six cycles of either 0.9x10(6) or 5x10(6) DC/intradermal injection, at 2-weekly intervals. Where possible, treatment continued with the lower dose at 6-weekly intervals. The remaining five patients could not complete priming, due to progressive disease. Three of the 12 patients who completed priming have durable complete responses (average duration 35 months+), three had partial responses, and the remaining six had progressive disease (WHO criteria). Disease regression was not correlated with dose or with the development of delayed type hypersensitivity responses to intradermal challenge with irradiated, autologous tumour. However, plasma S-100B levels prior to the commencement of treatment correlated with objective clinical response ( P=0.05) and survival (log rank P<0.001). The treatment had minimal side-effects and was well tolerated by all patients. Mature, monocyte-derived DC preparations exposed to appropriate tumour antigen sources can be reliably produced for patients with advanced metastatic melanoma, and in a subset of those patients with lower volume disease their repeated administration results in durable complete responses.