Curing Death
  Recent News |  Archives |  Tags |  About |  Newsletter |  Submit News |  Advertise With Us |  Subscribe to CuringDeath.com RSS Fee Subscribe
New Articles
Researchers discover new enzyme in cancer growth 12/4/2008

Cellular senescence a double-edged sword 12/4/2008

Prostate cancer spurs new nerves 12/4/2008

Researchers learn that some 'good cholesterol' isn't good enough 12/4/2008

New study indicates smallpox vaccination effective for decades 12/4/2008

Scientists film inner workings of the immune system 12/4/2008

Prostate cancer drug reduces testosterone levels in as little as 3 days 12/4/2008

Scientists probe limits of 'cancer stem-cell model' 12/4/2008

Selenium may slow march of AIDS 12/3/2008

Where does the gene activity of youth go? New findings may hold the key 12/3/2008

Researchers identify genomic causes of a certain type of leukemia relapse 12/2/2008

Master gene plays key role in blood sugar levels 12/2/2008

Researchers recreate SARS virus, open door for potential defenses against future strains 12/2/2008

Scientists discover 21st century plague 12/2/2008

Radiation before surgery improves pancreatic cancer outcomes 12/1/2008

Research Suggests New Treatment Suitable for All Patients With Least-Curable Brain Tumors (1/2/2008)

Tags:
cancer, tumors, brain

New research at Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center suggests that a three-drug cocktail may one day improve outcomes in patients with glioblastoma multiforme (GBM), a type of brain tumor with a dismal prognosis. Two of the drug candidates have been developed, and the team is working on the third - all targeted to kill or impair cancer cells and spare healthy brain.

Waldemar Debinski, M.D., Ph.D., senior researcher and director of the Wake Forest Brain Tumor Center of Excellence, predicts that the cocktail could be tested in patients within five years.

The treatment would be based on the first-ever documented "molecular signature" of GBM tumors. The researchers had previously reported that three different proteins are found in high levels individually in these cancers. In the current study, reported in Clinical Cancer Research, they examined 76 specimens of brain tumor, including 46 GBMs, and nine normal brain samples, to determine how frequently the markers appeared together.

Expression of all three markers was significantly higher in GBM tissue compared to normal brain and to brain tumors that aren't as aggressive as GBM. Particularly important was that all GBM tumors had at least one of the markers present and 95 percent of tumors had at least two.

"This finding offers a unique opportunity for treatment," said Debinski. "Without any pre-therapy testing, we would know for sure that at least one of these targets is highly present in each patient and that the patient is suitable for the combination of off-the-shelf drugs. It is like having a crystal ball."

In a recent issue of Molecular Cancer Therapeutics, the researchers reported developing a potent treatment targeted to one of the proteins (EphA2). In addition, a drug targeted to a second protein, interleukin 13 receptor alpha 2 (IL-13R?2), is already being tested alone in a phase 3 clinical trial. In this trial, the second protein is showing significant benefits to patients, and newer generations are in development. The team is working to develop a drug to target a third marker (Fra-1).

GBM tumors are often resistant to current treatments, including chemotherapy and radiation therapy. The mean survival rate of patients with GBM is about 14 months and has improved only slightly over the past decades.

"Developing molecularly targeted therapies using genetically engineered bacterial toxins represents an attractive option that may improve outcomes," said Debinski.

The fact that the three markers were not found in healthy brain tissue suggests that the proteins are highly suited as targets for therapies designed to kill cancer cells and spare healthy brain tissue. In Molecular Cancer Therapeutics, the team reported success creating a drug to kill cancer cells that have high levels of EphA2. The drug, which would be delivered by catheters directly to the tumor, was created by chemically linking a protein that binds to EphA2 with a modified bacterial toxin.

In the laboratory, the treatment potently killed all of the over-expressing EphA2 cells within 48 hours. It was also effective at reducing tumors in mice. The researchers compared the treatment's potency to the drug Debinski had previously developed to target cells that express IL-13R?2.

"Both were extremely effective and highly potent," said Debinski. "Some of the tumor cells responded to the IL-13 cytotoxin, some responded to EphA2-targeted cytotoxin and some responded to both. This illustrates why we need a cocktail to cover as many patients as possible."

He said this combination treatment might also apply to breast, pancreas and prostate cancers, which also have high levels of these proteins.

The third marker, Fra-1, is believed to control the malignant features of brain tumor cells, such as the development new blood vessels to "feed" the tumor.

An additional benefit of targeting the three proteins is that the drug cocktail affects targets residing in the GBM cellular signaling pathways, including a pathway (epidermal growth factor receptor vIII) that is known to control the expression of all three proteins. These pathways are known to be important in tumor progression.

"With the drug cocktail we may be taking care of cancer cells that are really important for tumor survival," said Debinski. "It may be the best of two worlds."

The research was funded by the National Cancer Institute, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Wake Forest Brain Tumor Center of Excellence. Co-researchers were Jill Wykosky, Ph.D. candidate, lead author of the two manuscripts, Denise M. Gibo, B.S., and Constance Staton, M.D., all with Wake Forest.

Note: This story has been adapted from a news release issued by Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center

Cheap Electricity - Renegade motorhomes - Credit Counseling - Debt Consolidation

Comments:

1. Gregory D. Pawelski

1/5/2008 10:34:11 PM MST

The headlong rush to develop tests to identify molecular predisposing mechanisms still does not guarantee that a drug will be effective for an individual patient. Nor can they, for any patient or even large group of patients, discriminate the potential for clinical activity among different agents of the same class.

It may be very important to zero in on different genes and proteins. However, when actually taking the targeted drugs, do the drugs even enter the cancer cell? Once entered, does it immediately get metabolized or pumped out, or does it accumulate?

In some cases, these drugs may kill tumor cells without killing microvascular cells in the same time frame. In other cases, they kill microvascular cells without killing tumor cells. In yet other cases, they kill both type of cells or neither type of cells. The ability of these agents to kill tumor and/or microvascular cells in the same tumor is highly variable among the different agents.

What needs to be done is to sort out what's the best profile in terms of which patients benefit from this drug or that drug. Can they be combined? What's the proper way to work with all the new drugs? If a drug works extremely well for a certain percentage of cancer patients, can they be identified?

So all the validation of this gene or that protein providing us with a variety of sophisticated techniques to provide new insights into the tumorigenic process, if the targeted drug either won't "get in" in the first place or if it gets pumped out/extruded or if it gets immediately metabolized inside the cell, it just isn't going to work. Each targeted drug is not for everybody. Even when the disease is the same type, different patients' tumors respond differently to the same agent or agents.

Once we are able to take a cancer specimen, analyze it, and follow those genetic changes that influence particular pathways, then one, two, three or more targeted therapies, perhaps simultaneously, will be able to completely interrupt the flow of the cancer process.

It's not a case of throwing targeted drugs at the problem. It's knowing "what" targeted drugs work and "how" to use them in "individual" patients (not average populations). The problem is that few drugs work the way scientists think they do and few of them take the time to think through what it is they are using them for.


Leave a Reply:

Search

  Archives |  Submit News |  Advertise With Us |  Contact Us |  Links
All contents © 2000 - 2009 Web Doodle, LLC. All rights reserved.
Web Doodle, LLC does not provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Please read our disclaimer