PMCC PMCC

Search tips
Search criteria

Advanced
Results 1-12 (12)
 

Clipboard (0)
None
Journals
Authors
more »
Year of Publication
Document Types
1.  Combining mTOR Inhibitors with Chemotherapy and Other Targeted Therapies in Advanced Breast Cancer: Rationale, Clinical Experience, and Future Directions 
Improvements in survival of patients with breast cancer have been attributed to the development of agents that target key components of dysregulated pathways involved in oncogenesis and progression of breast cancer. Aberrant mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) activation has been implicated in oncogenesis, angiogenesis, and the development of estrogen independence and resistance to chemotherapy in breast tumors. Several mTOR inhibitors (sirolimus, everolimus, temsirolimus, and ridaforolimus) have demonstrated antitumor activity in breast cancer cells. Combining mTOR inhibitors with endocrine therapies has demonstrated clinical antitumor activity in patients with metastatic breast cancer. In addition, mTOR inhibitor combinations with various targeted biologic agents or cytotoxic chemotherapeutic agents are being examined in more than 40 clinical trials with some early promising results. Combination therapies targeting multiple components of these central signaling pathways may be an optimal treatment strategy for patients with advanced breast cancer.
doi:10.4137/BCBCR.S10071
PMCID: PMC3579426  PMID: 23492649
mTOR; hormone receptor; HER2; advanced breast cancer
2.  Why, After Chemotherapy, is it Necessary to Assess Memory Using Translational Testing? 
As the number of cancer survivors rises, so does the importance of understanding what happens post-chemotherapy. The evidence is clear that chemotherapy affects not only cancer cells, but also healthy cells including neurons, leading to long-term cognitive dysfunction in a large portion of survivors. In order to understand the mechanism of action and in the hope of reducing the potential neurocognitive side effects of chemotherapy, pre-clinical testing should be used more effectively. However, the field is lacking translation from clinical studies to animal models. Spatial learning and memory paradigms based on the water maze, the most commonly used rodent model, are available for translational testing in humans and could overcome this weakness. There is an overwhelming need in the field to understand whether the water maze is an adequate model for post-chemotherapy impairments or whether other paradigms should be used. This is of great importance for the understanding of the mechanisms, side effects of new drugs, appropriate pharmacotherapy, and confounding factors related to chemotherapy treatment regiments. This review is very important to both basic scientists and clinicians determining how translational paradigms are critical to future cancer research, as well as what type of paradigms are appropriate in our technically advancing society.
doi:10.4137/BCBCR.S10293
PMCID: PMC3512448  PMID: 23226022
water maze; cancer; memory; spatial; translation
3.  Is the Improved Efficacy of Trastuzumab and Lapatinib Combination Worth the Added Toxicity? A Discussion of Current Evidence, Recommendations, and Ethical Issues Regarding Dual HER2-Targeted Therapy 
Following FDA approval of trastuzumab in 1998 and lapatinib in 2007, several clinical studies have addressed the question of whether trastuzumab and lapatinib combination therapy is better than trastuzumab alone in the metastatic breast cancer and neoadjuvant setting. In this review, updated to September 2012, we focus on the relevant clinical trials that address this question and, based on the available data, reach conclusions regarding a rational and reasonably individualized approach to the management of HER2+ breast cancer. With the FDA approval of pertuzumab in June 2012 and the likely approval of T-DM1 approaching, several ethical issues overshadow the excitement oncologists have for these new treatment options. We discuss the potential evolution of highly active anti-HER2 therapy (HAAHT) as an optimal treatment paradigm for HER2+ breast cancer. Additionally, we review lessons learned from the evolution of HAART for HIV treatment.
doi:10.4137/BCBCR.S9301
PMCID: PMC3512454  PMID: 23226023
HER2; breast cancer; lapatinib; trastuzumab; dual; T-DM1; pertuzumab
4.  Taxanes for the Treatment of Metastatic Breast Cancer 
Taxanes have remained a cornerstone of breast cancer treatment over the past three decades, improving the lives of patients with both early- and late-stage disease. The purpose of this review is to summarize the current role of taxanes, including an albumin-bound formulation that enhances delivery of paclitaxel to tumors, in the management of metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Since the introduction of Cremophor EL-paclitaxel to the clinic in the mid-1990s, a substantial amount of investigation has gone into subjects such as formulation, dose, schedule, and taxane resistance, allowing physicians greater flexibility in treating patients with MBC. This review will also examine how the shrinking pool of taxane-naive patients, a result of the expansion of taxanes into the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings, will respond to taxane retreatment for metastatic disease. Taxane treatment seems likely to continue to play an important role in the treatment of MBC.
doi:10.4137/BCBCR.S8205
PMCID: PMC3486789  PMID: 23133315
taxanes; metastatic breast cancer; paclitaxel; docetaxel; nab-paclitaxel
5.  Efficacy and Tolerability of Lapatinib in the Management of Breast Cancer 
Approximately 20%–25% of all breast cancers over express a key cell surface growth factor receptor known as HER2. HER2 plays a key role in cell growth and proliferation and is linked to worse clinical outcomes, making it a logical therapeutic target. The first HER2 targeted drug to be approved by the FDA, was the humanized monoclonal antibody trastuzumab, after it showed improvements in survival in the adjuvant setting, and delayed time to progression in the metastatic setting. Although highly effective, for reasons that are not clear, some patients display resistance to trastuzumab. Lapatinib is an oral, small molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor, that inhibits both the HER1 ahd HER2 receptors and may be able to overcome trastuzumab resistance. Lapatinib is approved in the second line setting for use in combination with capecitabine or with letrozole. In this review, we will discuss the indications, concerns or any issues with regards to the drug.
doi:10.4137/BCBCR.S6374
PMCID: PMC3306225  PMID: 22438669
breast cancer; lapatinib; efficacy; tolerability
6.  Efficacy of Bevacizumab-Capecitabine in Combination for the First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Breast Cancer 
There is an ongoing need for development of new chemotherapeutic regimens for metastatic breast cancer [mBC], especially when tumors lack therapeutic targets such as the estrogen or progesterone receptor [ER/PR], or the human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 [HER2]. Capecitabine is an orally bioavailable fluoropyrimidine approved for monotherapy in mBC, and bevacizumab is a monoclonal antibody targeting vascular endothelial growth factor which has shown to be active in mBC and tolerable in combination with other chemotherapeutics. The combination of these two agents has been explored in multiple phase II and III clinical studies, with improvements in progression-free survival and overall response rates noted as compared to capecitabine monotherapy. However, the use of bevacizumab in combination with capecitabine and other chemotherapy agents for mBC remains beset with controversy due to safety concerns, cost issues, and pending regulatory decisions.
doi:10.4137/BCBCR.S7379
PMCID: PMC3235996  PMID: 22174585
metastatic breast cancer; capecitabine; bevacizumab
7.  Exemestane in the Adjuvant Treatment of Breast Cancer in Postmenopausal Women 
Exemestane is an irreversible inhibitor of the aromatase enzyme, which is a key component in the production of estrogen. The majority of breast cancers are sensitive to the proliferative effects of estrogen. Exemestane is approved for the adjuvant treatment of postmenopausal women with breast cancer after 2 to 3 years of tamoxifen therapy, based on a 32% improvement in disease-free survival compared with 5 years of tamoxifen alone (P < 0.001). Exemestane has also shown clinical benefits as an upfront therapy. The safety profile of exemestane shares some side effects with tamoxifen (hot flashes and arthralgia), but is not associated with an increased risk of endometrial cancer or thromboembolic events. This review will discuss in detail the efficacy and safety of exemestane in early breast cancer.
doi:10.4137/BCBCR.S6234
PMCID: PMC3201097  PMID: 22084574
aromatase inhibitor; breast cancer; exemestane; disease-free survival; tamoxifen
8.  Management Options in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer 
Notorious for its poor prognosis and aggressive nature, triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) is a heterogeneous disease entity. The nature of its biological specificity, which is similar to basal-like cancers, tumors arising in BRCA1 mutation carriers, and claudin-low cancers, is currently being explored in hopes of finding the targets for novel biologics and chemotherapeutic agents. In this review, we aim to give a broad overview of the disease’s nomenclature and epidemiology, as well as the basic mechanisms of emerging targeted therapies and their performance in clinical trials to date.
doi:10.4137/BCBCR.S6562
PMCID: PMC3153117  PMID: 21863131
triple-negative breast cancer; basal-like; targeted therapy
9.  Safety and Efficacy of nab-Paclitaxel in the Treatment of Patients with Breast Cancer 
Taxanes are highly active chemotherapeutic agents in the treatment of early-stage and metastatic breast cancer. Novel formulations have been developed to improve efficacy and decrease toxicity associated with these cytotoxic agents. nab-paclitaxel is a solvent free, albumin-bound 130-nanometer particle formulation of paclitaxel (Abraxane®, Abraxis Bioscience), which was developed to avoid toxicities of the Cremophor vehicle used in solvent-based paclitaxel. In a phase III clinical trial, nab-paclitaxel demonstrated higher response rates, better safety and side-effect profile compared to conventional paclitaxel, and improved survival in patients receiving it as second line therapy. Higher doses can be administered over a shorter infusion time without the need for special infusion sets or pre-medications. It is now approved in the US for treatment of breast cancer after failure of combination chemotherapy for metastatic disease or relapse within 6 months of adjuvant therapy, where prior therapy included an anthracycline. Recently, several phase II studies have suggested a role for nab-paclitaxel as a single agent and in combination with other agents for first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer.
doi:10.4137/BCBCR.S5857
PMCID: PMC3091407  PMID: 21603258
nab-paclitaxel; nab-technology; paclitaxel; metastatic breast cancer; taxanes
10.  Ixabepilone as Monotherapy or in Combination with Capecitabine for the Treatment of Advanced Breast Cancer 
Breast Cancer is the most prevalent cancer in the world with 4.4 million survivors up to 5 years following the diagnosis.1 In the US alone approximately forty thousand women die annually of metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Despite many effective systemic treatment options approximately 50% of women with MBC succumb to the disease within 24 months of the diagnosis.2 Ixabepilone is a novel, first in class member of the epothilone class of antineoplastic agents. Ixabepilone is indicated as monotherapy for the treatment of metastatic or locally advanced breast cancer in patients whose tumors are resistant or refractory to anthracyclines, taxanes, and Capecitabine. Ixabepilone is also indicated in combination with Capecitabine for the treatment of patients with metastatic or locally advanced breast cancer resistant to treatment with an anthracycline and a taxane, or whose cancer is taxane resistant and for whom further anthracycline therapy is contraindicated. Ixabepilone was extensively studied as a single agent in patients with MBC and was found to be effective and well tolerated with a predictable and manageable safety profile. Not surprisingly prior exposure to anthracyclines and taxanes affects significantly the potential for response to therapy with single agent Ixabepilone in metastatic setting. MBC patients with taxane resistant MBC have objective response rate (RR) of 12%, patients with prior low exposure to taxanes and/or resistance RR = 22%, Ixabepilone treatment after adjuvant anthracycline therapy exposure renders RR = 42% and in Taxane naïve patients RR = 57%. In two large phase III studies of Ixabepilone + Capecitabine versus Capecitabine alone, progression free survival (PFS) and overall response rates (RR) were higher in the combination treatment arms, but no survival advantage was seen overall. Treatment with Ixabepilone + Capecitabine in a phase II study resulted in an overall response rate (ORR) of 23% in ER/PR/HER2 negative, triple-negative breast cancer patients (TNBC) while ORR of 31% was seen in a preplanned pooled analysis of TNBC in the phase III trials of Ixabepilone + Capecitabine. Significantly prolonged median PFS was seen for TNBC treated with the combination of Ixabepilone + Capecitabine compared to Capecitabine alone 4.2 vs. 1.7 months respectively. Ixabepilone as single agent appears to show excellent antitumor activity in patients with TNBC MBC. Addition of Ixabepilone to Capecitabine results in approximately doubling in median PFS for TNBC versus Capecitabine alone. Single agent Ixabepilone is generally well tolerated, and its toxicity profile does not overlap with that of Capecitabine and therefore depending on prior exposure to chemotherapy both single agent Ixabepilone or in combination with Capecitabine can be used safely and effectively for treatment of advanced breast cancer.
doi:10.4137/BCBCR.S5331
PMCID: PMC3076013  PMID: 21494397
Ixabepilone; metastatic breast cancer; monotherapy; in combination with capecitabine; triple negative breast cancer
11.  Growth Factor Receptors and Apoptosis Regulators: Signaling Pathways, Prognosis, Chemosensitivity and Treatment Outcomes of Breast Cancer 
Biomarkers of breast cancer are necessary for prognosis and prediction to chemotherapy. Prognostic biomarkers provide information regarding outcome irrespective of therapy, while predictive biomarkers provide information regarding response to therapy. Candidate prognostic biomarkers for breast cancers are growth factor receptors, steroid receptors, Ki-67, cyclins, urokinase plasminogen activator, p53, p21, pro- and anti-apoptotic factors, BRCA1 and BRCA2. But currently, the predictive markers are Estrogen and Progesterone receptors responding to endocrine therapy, and HER-2 responding to herceptin. But there are numerous breast cancer cases, where tamoxifen is ineffective even after estrogen receptor positivity. This lead to search of new prognostic and predictive markers and the number of potential markers is constantly increasing due to proteomics and genomics studies. However, most biomarkers individually have poor sensitivity or specificity, or other clinical value. It can be resolved by studying various biomarkers simultaneously, which will help in better prognosis and increasing sensitivity for chemotherapeutic agents. This review is focusing on growth factor receptors, apoptosis markers, signaling cascades, and their correlation with other associated biomarkers in breast cancers. As our knowledge regarding molecular biomarkers for breast cancer increases, prognostic indices will be developed that combine the predictive power of individual molecular biomarkers with specific clinical and pathologic factors. Rigorous comparison of these existing as well as emerging markers with current treatment selection is likely to see an escalation in an era of personalized medicines to ensure the breast cancer patients receive optimal treatment. This will also solve the treatment modalities and complications related to chemotherapeutic regimens.
PMCID: PMC3086304  PMID: 21556249
prognostic markers; estrogen; growth factor receptor; apoptosis; chemotherapy; mitogen-activated protein kinase
12.  Podosomes and Invadopodia: Related structures with Common Protein Components that May Promote Breast Cancer Cellular Invasion 
Summary:
A rate-limiting step in breast cancer progression is acquisition of the invasive phenotype, which can precede metastasis. Expression of cell-surface proteases at the leading edge of a migrating cell provides cells with a mechanism to cross tissue barriers. A newly appreciated mechanism that may be relevant for breast cancer cell invasion is the formation of invadopodia, well-defined structures that project from the ventral membrane and promote degradation of the extracellular matrix, allowing the cell to cross a tissue barrier. Recently, there has been some controversy and discussion as to whether invadopodia, which are associated with carcinoma cells, are related to a similar structure called podosomes, which are associated with normal cells. Invadopodia and podosomes share many common characteristics, including a similar size, shape, subcellular localization and an ability to promote invasion. These two structures also share many common protein components, which we outline herein. It has been speculated that podosomes may be precursors to invadopodia and by extension both structures may be relevant to cancer cell invasion. Here, we compare and contrast the protein components of invadopodia and podosomes and discuss a potential role for these proteins and the evidence that supports a role for invadopodia and podosomes in breast cancer invasion.
PMCID: PMC3085414  PMID: 21655365
invadopodia; podosomes; invasion; breast cancer

Results 1-12 (12)